PDA

View Full Version : The Iran situation


RALPH WIGGUM
06-15-2009, 01:50 PM
A lot going on there.
Should they be able to own the nuclear weapon? Is Ahmadinejad a good president or a dictator? Were the elections legit? What do you think is gonna happen now with Moussavi's supporters protesting? It's a divided country for sure.

food for thought
06-15-2009, 02:55 PM
i dont tink the elections were legit lol he stratight stole that shit

the way theyre poltical system is set-up, they should have went for "round two" (as they call it)

they had 4 hopefuls and ahmedinajad and the other guy were thought to get the most votes.

then those two were supposed to go head to head.


so the fact that it didnt even go to "round 2" is highly suspicious and a reason to believe t was not legit.


on the nuclear weapons,

i think nobody shoud have them, but since its not like that, they have every right to develop the eapons as long as Israel has the right to do so withought being checked.

nuclear energy, they have the right to develop it




i believe theyre gona have re-elctions. the Shah has came out and said it was not legt. his word is final.

RALPH WIGGUM
06-15-2009, 03:06 PM
Well I son't think the elections were legit neither, the day before Moussavi was like we got 80% of the people behind us, and the next day he gets 37%.
But I don't know if they're gonna have reelections, and the Shah is dead. They don't have one since the Islamic revolution. The Ayathollas run the shit now.
On nuclear weapons I think the same way, no one should have them but those who got them don't really got the right to forbid others to get them.

Ghost In The 'Lac
06-15-2009, 03:06 PM
demonstrations today bigger than ever.

shit tones of peeps ignoring orders to stay inside and are demonstrating all over the place, big crowds

US wont want to see this. If the western public think the Iranian people hate the government, they wont be as in support of attacking them.

Interesting situation there though, big troubles in little china

RALPH WIGGUM
06-15-2009, 03:13 PM
Well in Europe they talk a lot about it cause they're like "you see we were right even Iranians don't like Ahmadinejad". It's hard to know what's true and what's exagerated, but that's a though situation for sure. Ahmadinejad's supporters are blaming western countries for the demonstrations.

food for thought
06-15-2009, 03:17 PM
The Ayathollas run the shit now.

yea thats who i meant.

Khamimi

food for thought
06-15-2009, 03:21 PM
yea, large demonstatrations on both sides

lets hope they stay united and not fight each other like the Palestinians.

if they have re-elections, it will be interesting to see who wins.

no doudt, some will be demostrating that aswell


they need international observers to help maintain the legitamacy of the elections

Ghost In The 'Lac
06-15-2009, 03:23 PM
Iran was a great country with huge prospects before the Ayatollahs took over in the 70's.

As soon as they took control it went to shit. Its sad.

It went from the Persians to the Arabs. Persians lost their identity to these islam religious fanatics.

Mr. Muhammad
06-15-2009, 03:37 PM
Salaam (Peace) to all...

The whole thing smells of "covert ops"..."destabilization and overthrow"...reminds me of that video "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man".

Strange that we heard no mention of civil unrest or tensions in Iran until right before the elections. Mighty "convenient", if you ask me.

And AFTER the Elections, all text messaging in Iran is DISABLED? No TWITTER or FACEBOOK in Iran now? WHY NOT? Why don't they want the "common people's" voice heard?

The only thing I can be sure of is that the people who relay the news to us have no interest in accurately representing the FACTS.

Ghost In The 'Lac
06-15-2009, 04:13 PM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/5536288/Iran-elections-The-hope-that-Iran-threw-away.html

Iran elections: The hope that Iran threw away

A vital chance to rebuild economic relations with the West was lost in the disputed election, writes David Blair.



By David Blair
Published: 12:24AM BST 15 Jun 2009
Comments 13 (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/5536288/Iran-elections-The-hope-that-Iran-threw-away.html#comments) | Comment on this article (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/5536288/Iran-elections-The-hope-that-Iran-threw-away.html#postComment)


The mass protests against the outcome of Iran's election seemed to carry an air of desperate anger. Perhaps the most moving scene involved a group of young demonstrators, displaying the green colours of Mir-Hossein Mousavi, the defeated challenger, breaking into English and chanting: "We want freedom."

In an instant, these television pictures from Tehran delivered a stark reminder that Iran is not a backward country of medieval fanatics, but a modern nation with 70 million people, two thirds of whom are under 30 and have the same interests and aspirations as their Western counterparts.

Related Articles



Iran election: leaked results show Ahmadinejad lost (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/5540211/Iran-protest-cancelled-as-leaked-election-results-show-Mahmoud-Amadinejad-came-third.html)
Opposition leaders join thousands protesting in Iran (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/5542075/Opposition-leaders-join-thousands-protesting-in-Iran.html)
Iranian reformist calls for more protest (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/5533782/Defeated-Iranian-reformist-Mir-Hossein-Mousavi-calls-for-more-protest-against-Mahmoud-Ahmadinejad.html)
Iran elections: anger on the streets of Tehran (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/5525274/Iran-elections-anger-on-the-streets-of-Tehran.html)
Iran polls open as electorate give verdict on Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/5511805/Iran-polls-open-as-electorate-give-verdict-on-Mahmoud-Ahmadinejad.html)
Iran elections: revolt as crowds protest at Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's 'rigged' victory (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/5526721/Iran-elections-revolt-as-crowds-protest-at-Mahmoud-Ahmadinejads-rigged-victory.html)


Yet they must live under a theocratic regime, dominated by the enigmatic figure of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader. The lesson of this election is clear: the hard men who wield real power in Iran – and the newly re-elected President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is only their most visible representative – are determined never to loosen their grip.
The unspoken theme of Iranian politics for the past decade has been the tension between the country's ageing clerical establishment and a youthful, culturally Westernised population, with no memory of the Islamic Revolution of 1979 or the corrupt, repressive era of Shah Reza Pahlavi.
This gulf between the rulers and their people has been widened by decades of economic failure, caused by the country's isolation from the West and the squandering of its immense oil wealth. Consequently, Iran is burdened by crushing levels of youth unemployment, and its brightest and best people have emigrated in their millions.
Ayatollah Khamenei and his allies are clearly aware of the potential threat all this poses to the regime. Regular elections are the one safety valve they allow for discontent. The result of the presidential poll announced on Saturday, however, shows the limits.
If the shadowy figures who really rule Iran decide that victory for their favoured candidate is sufficiently important – and Mr Ahmadinejad is clearly their chosen frontman – then the authorities will duly guarantee that he wins. Anyone who protests against this outcome risks the wrath of the Islamic Republic's plethora of security forces.
In this case, however, the Supreme Leader and his allies may not be acting in their own interests. If their goal is to press ahead with their nuclear programme, while avoiding international pressure and a possible war with America or Israel, they have almost certainly made the wrong move.
A remarkable coup was there for the taking had they been willing to allow Mr Mousavi to win. Iran would then have become the first country in the history of the Middle East to remove a sitting president in a peaceful election. Its global image would have been transformed.
Among Western governments, there would have been – in the words of one British official – "a yearning" to give the new President Mousavi a chance. Turning the screw on Iran by imposing more sanctions or preparing a military strike would have been off the agenda.
Meanwhile, the centrifuges inside Iran's underground nuclear plant at Natanz are turning out about 100 kg of low-enriched uranium every month. If the regime's gameplan is to play for time while it perfects its nuclear programme and eventually acquires the option of building an atomic bomb, allowing Mr Mousavi to win would have been the best possible course.
Instead, Mr Ahmadinejad's controversial re-election will have two dangerous consequences. First, it could be seen as a repudiation of President Barack Obama's offer of a new relationship between Iran and America.
Washington's overtures towards the Islamic Republic have gone further than many expected. Since taking office, Mr Obama has not only sought to placate Iran's yearning for respect by hailing the glories of its culture and history, he has also offered the regime unconditional talks on any subject.
So far, Tehran has simply failed to respond. America and her allies have twice offered Iran technical help with a civilian nuclear programme, along with trade and investment, if the regime obeys five United Nations resolutions and stops enriching uranium. Once again, Iran has not responded. Officials from the six countries who made this offer – Britain, America, Germany, France, Russia and China – want to meet their Iranian counterparts to discuss the proposal. They have been trying to fix a date since April.
So far, Tehran will not even agree an appointment. Saeed Jalili, a hardline ally of Mr Ahmadinejad who serves as secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, routinely fails to respond to these requests.
This leads to the second consequence of Mr Ahmadinejad's victory: those who argue that talks with Iran are pointless because the regime is not interested in resolving the nuclear issue will have their hand strengthened. They will point to the president's words yesterday when he declared that the nuclear question "belongs in the past".
In particular, Israel's hardline government under Benjamin Netanyahu must be heaving a sigh of relief at the outcome of Iran's election. The argument for turning the screw on Iran, first by tightening economic sanctions and then, in extremis, by preparing military strikes against the country's nuclear facilities will become harder to resist.
There is a chance that all this will prove unduly pessimistic. Some officials advance a slender case for optimism about Mr Ahmadinejad. He is, at least, a known quantity. As a visceral hardliner with nothing to prove, he may be better placed to make a deal on the principle that only Richard Nixon, the staunch anti-communist, could have restored America's relations with China. Moreover, Mr Ahmadinejad clearly enjoys the trust of Ayatollah Khamenei – and no rapprochement with the West could happen without the Supreme Leader's approval.
The central question is whether Iran has the political will to reach an agreement. By any rational analysis, the country's rulers should be looking for a way out. There is, after all, a remorseless logic behind their predicament.
The long-term failure of Iran's economy – and the inexorable growth of youth unemployment this has caused – must eventually threaten the regime's survival. Anyone who wants to preserve the Islamic Republic must revive the economy. This requires a degree of openness to trade and investment from the West. Therefore, Iran's isolation must be ended and the confrontation over the nuclear programme resolved.
The crucial divide in Iranian politics is between those who accept this logic and those who do not. Mr Mousavi has said enough to show that he is on the right side of this argument. He recently told the Financial Times that economic revival would be his priority, and he explicitly linked this to easing tensions with the West.
"In foreign policy, we can have better relations with the world, which is surely very significant to help our country's development," he said. "I consider dιtente the principle to build confidence between Iran and other countries."
Mr Ahmadinejad, by contrast, has shown through word and deed that he fails to grasp the link between his country's isolation and its domestic woes.
This leaves the burning question: on which side of the divide is Ayatollah Khamenei? After almost 20 years as Supreme Leader, he turns 70 next month. His position at the apex of the country's opaque power structure is probably secure for the rest of his life.
But he wants to bequeath an Islamic Republic to his successor, and he must have pondered the central dilemma: would resolving the confrontation with the West render this more or less likely?
The Ayatollah's public statements, filled with references to Western "conspiracies" and "enemies", suggest that he actually prefers isolation. So does his backing for Mr Ahmadinejad.
Yet, in this country of shadows, Ayatollah Khamenei's real opinions are the most important riddle of all. For good or ill, the next few years will reveal the answer.

Olive Oil Goombah
06-15-2009, 04:38 PM
You know, for all the shit that George Bush took, I'd figure the world wide legion of protesters would join hand in hand with the Iranians and protest Ahmadinejad.

Its pretty obvious this election is a farce and it really doesnt surprise me.

The nerve of these people to point fingers at someone else.

Their credibility is shit.

Let Europe deal with it, since they know so much about it and its in their back yard.


I think the US should just let it be....let the Iranians protest. Let them sort it out themselves.

As far as nuclear weapons or technology goes....I'm not for anyone else being able to obtain nuclear weapons.
That just increases the possibility that one may be used.

Israel this, Israel that......they blame everything on the Israel situation but im not really buyin all that shit especially from non Palestinians.

Ghost In The 'Lac
06-15-2009, 04:57 PM
fuck isreal

TheBoarzHeadBoy
06-15-2009, 05:08 PM
The only things Ahmadinejad has done wrong are:

1. Threatened his enemies hollowly.

2. Not mobilized his military to liberate Iraq, outnumbering an overstretched US military and forcing Israel to confront his legions of Revolutionary Guard and slaughter their ass. This would force Europeans (NATO) to either engage in a pointless war against a local powerhouse who would manage to draw forces from radical groups across the region, Syria's army, and spark a full scale uprising in Afghanistan by having the Ayatollahs declare it a Jihad. If Europe didn't aid America, America would be forced to draft its people leading to a Vietnam part II and a serious collapse of American support for the Government and military. Europe would also be viewed as a bunch of stuck up bastards unwilling to help solve the worlds problems.

If he manages to defeat the United States, he'll be well on his way to kicking off a Islamic Revolution across most of the Arab nations, leading to a reemergence of a united Islamic Caliphate ruling from Tehran. He could probably have the Saudi King given the title Khalif or something to legitimatize the motion.

Ahmadinejad is probably one of my favorite world leaders. I hate Muslims who claim they're a religion of Peace. Islam is a religion of Law. You fuck with Muslims you're going to have a hard time feeding yourself with no hands... Dat's kharma.

Nick Fury
06-15-2009, 05:13 PM
fuck isreal

lol , yes fuck Isreal

food for thought
06-15-2009, 05:15 PM
The only things Ahmadinejad has done wrong are:

1. Threatened his enemies hollowly.

2. Not mobilized his military to liberate Iraq, outnumbering an overstretched US military and forcing Israel to confront his legions of Revolutionary Guard and slaughter their ass. This would force Europeans (NATO) to either engage in a pointless war against a local powerhouse who would manage to draw forces from radical groups across the region, Syria's army, and spark a full scale uprising in Afghanistan by having the Ayatollahs declare it a Jihad. If Europe didn't aid America, America would be forced to draft its people leading to a Vietnam part II and a serious collapse of American support for the Government and military. Europe would also be viewed as a bunch of stuck up bastards unwilling to help solve the worlds problems.

If he manages to defeat the United States, he'll be well on his way to kicking off a Islamic Revolution across most of the Arab nations, leading to a reemergence of a united Islamic Caliphate ruling from Tehran. He could probably have the Saudi King given the title Khalif or something to legitimatize the motion.

Ahmadinejad is probably one of my favorite world leaders. I hate Muslims who claim they're a religion of Peace. Islam is a religion of Law. You fuck with Muslims you're going to have a hard time feeding yourself with no hands... Dat's kharma.

intresting

the saudis fear the Iranians and their grasp at power at the region.

they are different sects.

do u think the sunnis and shi'ites ultimately can come together?

the pussy ass saudis are even siding with the US when it comes to Irans nuclear capability. theyre scared for their safety if Iran gets that power cause theyre
Sunni

Nick Fury
06-15-2009, 05:22 PM
Europe would also be viewed as a bunch of stuck up bastards unwilling to help solve the worlds problems.

Europe has cuased enough trouble as it is



Islam is a religion of Law. You fuck with Muslims you're going to have a hard time feeding yourself with no hands... Dat's kharma.

must be tuff to jerk off

Ghost In The 'Lac
06-15-2009, 05:23 PM
intresting

the saudis fear the Iranians and their grasp at power at the region.

they are different sects.

do u think the sunnis and shi'ites ultimately can come together?

the pussy ass saudis are even siding with the US when it comes to Irans nuclear capability. theyre scared for their safety if Iran gets that power cause theyre
Sunni

LOL Saudis arent scared of shit from Iran

Iran is a mess right now. The economy is dying, theyve blown all the Oil money from the last 30 years, unemployment is high, the young dont really like the Ayatollahs anymore.

food for thought
06-15-2009, 05:29 PM
thats why your acting like ure chris brown nigga, shut up



the Saudis support the americans when it comes to Iran and there attempts at developing nuclear energy. this is because they are sunni's and are scared of s shi'ite super power in the region.

this is not what i said this is the research of political scholars

food for thought
06-15-2009, 05:30 PM
theyve blown all the Oil money from the last 30 years

who said?

on what?

Ghost In The 'Lac
06-15-2009, 05:39 PM
coke

HANZO
06-15-2009, 06:19 PM
The only things Ahmadinejad has done wrong are:

1. Threatened his enemies hollowly.

2. Not mobilized his military to liberate Iraq, outnumbering an overstretched US military and forcing Israel to confront his legions of Revolutionary Guard and slaughter their ass. This would force Europeans (NATO) to either engage in a pointless war against a local powerhouse who would manage to draw forces from radical groups across the region, Syria's army, and spark a full scale uprising in Afghanistan by having the Ayatollahs declare it a Jihad. If Europe didn't aid America, America would be forced to draft its people leading to a Vietnam part II and a serious collapse of American support for the Government and military. Europe would also be viewed as a bunch of stuck up bastards unwilling to help solve the worlds problems.

If he manages to defeat the United States, he'll be well on his way to kicking off a Islamic Revolution across most of the Arab nations, leading to a reemergence of a united Islamic Caliphate ruling from Tehran. He could probably have the Saudi King given the title Khalif or something to legitimatize the motion.

Ahmadinejad is probably one of my favorite world leaders. I hate Muslims who claim they're a religion of Peace. Islam is a religion of Law. You fuck with Muslims you're going to have a hard time feeding yourself with no hands... Dat's kharma.

lmao your way way ahead of yourself. Tehran has never and will never lead some sort of Islamic revolution, no one will listen to them. Iran wont clash with NATO because that means it clashes with its biggest neighbour. aint gonna happen.

secondly no one is caliph, no one can grant you the title, especially no Saudi King. the last guy who was meant to inherit the title actually died in Normandy fighting for the allies. funny old world. and yes Islam is a religion of peace.

the situation in Iran is complex, from the outside you see millions march on the streets of Tehran protesting the government. but what you must realise is that Ahmedinejad gets the votes of the common uneducated poor Iranian. and theres a fucking lot of them. his naturally gonna win the election, the only ones who will vote against him are the upper class liberal iranians. and i doubt they are in such a great number outside of Tehran. One thing which is also important to acknowledge is that even if Musavi won, he wouldnt be able to make much change as the country is run by the Ayatollah.

Iran is a mess, the youth are starting to rise up against the Supreme leaders. but the majority are still on the side of the Ayatollah, it will take some time to convince the others that the Ayatollah is a cunt.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
06-15-2009, 07:39 PM
Why couldn't a new person become a Caliph? A Turk would be the Ideal person, but since the blood of Osman seems to be spent, could not a new dynasty be established.

At the very least a new Sultanate would be an interesting twist.

I'm aware that Iran and Arabia are not the same cult... er branch of Islam, but I would think some sort of unification is necessary if Islam is to prosper.

I mean honestly, they're arguing about a position that no longer exists... There is no Caliph, I don't know what the problem is.

I'm of the Opinion that the position shouldn't need to be held by a member of the bloodline. Does that make me a Sunni?

Obviously Iran are cunts but if they're going to be evil villains I at least expect some results ;)

diggy
06-15-2009, 08:48 PM
Where is the evidence of electoral cheating?

Where is the evidence of electoral cheating?

Where is the evidence of electoral cheating?

Olive Oil Goombah
06-15-2009, 09:44 PM
hahah..

shits funny when the shoe is on the other foot.

Role reversals and all of dat.

Nick Fury
06-15-2009, 10:22 PM
the ayatolla of rock in rolla

RALPH WIGGUM
06-16-2009, 05:04 AM
lmao your way way ahead of yourself. Tehran has never and will never lead some sort of Islamic revolution, no one will listen to them. Iran wont clash with NATO because that means it clashes with its biggest neighbour. aint gonna happen.

secondly no one is caliph, no one can grant you the title, especially no Saudi King. the last guy who was meant to inherit the title actually died in Normandy fighting for the allies. funny old world. and yes Islam is a religion of peace.

the situation in Iran is complex, from the outside you see millions march on the streets of Tehran protesting the government. but what you must realise is that Ahmedinejad gets the votes of the common uneducated poor Iranian. and theres a fucking lot of them. his naturally gonna win the election, the only ones who will vote against him are the upper class liberal iranians. and i doubt they are in such a great number outside of Tehran. One thing which is also important to acknowledge is that even if Musavi won, he wouldnt be able to make much change as the country is run by the Ayatollah.

Iran is a mess, the youth are starting to rise up against the Supreme leaders. but the majority are still on the side of the Ayatollah, it will take some time to convince the others that the Ayatollah is a cunt.

Exactly.
They've been a mess even before the Ayatollah. The Shah and his police murdered a lot of people during the revolution. Remember the black friday.
And I don't know if the uneducated poor iranian are so important, there are a lot of students too.

RALPH WIGGUM
06-16-2009, 05:17 AM
You know, for all the shit that George Bush took, I'd figure the world wide legion of protesters would join hand in hand with the Iranians and protest Ahmadinejad.

Its pretty obvious this election is a farce and it really doesnt surprise me.

The nerve of these people to point fingers at someone else.

Their credibility is shit.

Let Europe deal with it, since they know so much about it and its in their back yard.


I think the US should just let it be....let the Iranians protest. Let them sort it out themselves.

As far as nuclear weapons or technology goes....I'm not for anyone else being able to obtain nuclear weapons.
That just increases the possibility that one may be used.

Israel this, Israel that......they blame everything on the Israel situation but im not really buyin all that shit especially from non Palestinians.

Well it would be stupid to deny the role of the USA in Iran's history.
The CIA put the Shah back in power and the USA welcomed him when he had to left Iran after the revolution.
Jimmy Carter asked the Shah to hand over the power to Khomeini.

RALPH WIGGUM
06-16-2009, 05:21 AM
Where is the evidence of electoral cheating?

Where is the evidence of electoral cheating?

Where is the evidence of electoral cheating?

Take as much informations as you can and think about it.

SL33
06-16-2009, 05:41 AM
A lot going on there.
Should they be able to own the nuclear weapon? Is Ahmadinejad a good president or a dictator? Were the elections legit? What do you think is gonna happen now with Moussavi's supporters protesting? It's a divided country for sure.

they should be able to have Nukes. if france, usa or russia have those, why wouldn't they?
nuclear bomb is strategic weapon therefore every country strives for it. they didin't do anything aggressive (trashtalking against israel and west is part of folklore in asia)


we don't know is he good or bad, we're not persians. i don't beleive to CNN neither.
dictatorship is just a part of tradition in ths area, ever since ancient persia. (eastern despotism)



Iran is backed up by russia and China, that's so obvious.

SKANK HILL
06-16-2009, 06:08 AM
Where is the evidence of electoral cheating?

Where is the evidence of electoral cheating?

Where is the evidence of electoral cheating?

You can't provide evidence because there is no independent monitoring of the votes during elections in Iran so no one outside of the Mullah's knows. Not one election in Iran's history has been independently monitored. The voters are "helped" by "officials" to cast their vote as candidates and supporters are not allowed to be present.

Iranian elections are a great case of the rhetorical question; "If a tree falls in the woods and nobody is around to see it does it make a sound?"

If there is no independent monitoring of the vote count did the true result ever come to hand?

The right to vote in Iran is what is really fraudulant.

Ghost In The 'Lac
06-16-2009, 06:15 AM
Put it this way, your not gonna get to be the president of Iran if the Ayatollahs dont approve of you being the president of Iran.

And the people know this. Which is why theyre now upset, probably not so much at the outcome , more at the fact they now know the "election" was totally pointless.

The Ayatollah like Ahmidinjead. But they missed a big trick in not letting him lose. They have lost there fucking minds, they obviously dont give a shit about what ANYONE outside of Iran thinks of them, because if they did, they wouldve welcomed a new President, because it wouldve created sympathy and better feelings from other countries towards Iran like "oh look, theyre turing over a new leaf" type thing.

RALPH WIGGUM
06-17-2009, 02:42 PM
More demonstrations
9_hr7G4At84&feature=related

Also some Iran football players showed their support by playing wearing green, the color used by Moussavi during his campain.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
06-17-2009, 03:37 PM
Put it this way, your not gonna get to be the president of Iran if the Ayatollahs dont approve of you being the president of Iran.

And the people know this. Which is why theyre now upset, probably not so much at the outcome , more at the fact they now know the "election" was totally pointless.

The Ayatollah like Ahmidinjead. But they missed a big trick in not letting him lose. They have lost there fucking minds, they obviously dont give a shit about what ANYONE outside of Iran thinks of them, because if they did, they wouldve welcomed a new President, because it wouldve created sympathy and better feelings from other countries towards Iran like "oh look, theyre turing over a new leaf" type thing.

And that's when the liberal new guy nukes the shit out of those bastardly Israelis ;) and the world is all like "Wow..."

RALPH WIGGUM
06-19-2009, 05:20 PM
The Ayatollah definitely supports Ahmadinejad.
Wonder what the opposition is going to do now.

food for thought
06-20-2009, 12:35 AM
its bout to go daun tommorow.

check two
06-22-2009, 05:59 PM
R.I.P. to Neda:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/TtkiLBfHnvw&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/TtkiLBfHnvw&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090622/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_election_icon

Drunken Monk
06-22-2009, 06:18 PM
this situation on iran has been created by americans?

dont believe me?

contact wit me

SubConsciousThoughts
06-22-2009, 06:22 PM
this situation on iran has been created by americans?

dont believe me?

contact wit me

So even though there is massive corruption over there it's still Americas fault?

Why are you such a idiot?

HANZO
06-23-2009, 07:05 PM
that video of that Neda girl is fucking sad. sent a shiver down my spine when you saw the blood jus pour out of her mouth. shits fucked up.

Theres this vid circulating in Iran showing ppl taking Musavi votes ripping them up and re-voting for Ahmedinejad. apparently some village areas have had more votes counted than actual voters. shits questionable, i think ppl accept the fact that ahmedinejad won, but he shouldnt have won by that much of a margin, basically 50-50 between him and musavi. this would have meant the election entering a second round which would have resulted in Musavi winning as ppl who voted for the other candidates would have most likely voted for Musavi.

Its wrong what Iran's mullahs are doing to their ppl, shits no different than the period before the revolution. Its also important for western countries to keep out, you cant sanction Iran, you cant go to war with Iran. you certainly cant be like Britain and talk shit about Iran in this situation. since it was Britain who installed the Shah in the first place. which lead to Iran being fucked up.

check two
06-23-2009, 10:45 PM
CAIRO – An analysis by a British think tank highlights profound differences between voting patterns in Iran's recent election and hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's first victory in 2005, casting doubt on whether they could have occurred without manipulation.

The analysis by the London-based Chatham House could provide ammunition for supporters of Mir Hossein Mousavi, the pro-reform candidate who claims he was the true winner in the June 12 election.

The dispute has sparked more than a week of unrest in Iran that has killed at least 17 people and presented the regime with its greatest challenge since the 1979 Islamic revolution.

Iran's highest electoral authority acknowledged irregularities in the election for the first time Monday but insisted they did not affect the outcome.

The official results showed that Ahmadinejad received 13 million more votes than he and other conservatives got in the 2005 election, according to the Chatham House report, which was released Sunday.

The results would have required him to receive support in a third of the provinces from all former conservative voters, all former centrist voters, all new voters and almost half of all former reformist voters — an unlikely scenario, said the study.

Discontent with Ahmadinejad was running high among reformists and even some conservatives unhappy with his handling of the economy and his antagonistic stance toward the international community.

The final tally was 62.6 percent of the vote for Ahmadinejad and 33.75 percent for Mousavi — a landslide victory in a race that was perceived to be much closer.

Such a huge margin went against the expectation that a high turnout — a record 85 percent of Iran's 46.2 million eligible voters — would boost Mousavi, whose campaign energized young people to vote. About a third of the eligible voters were under 30.

Ahmadinejad has called the June 12 election "real and free."

The Chatham House report cast doubt on the idea that large numbers of conservative voters who had not voted in previous election might have come out this time to support Ahmadinejad.

While the official results indicate Ahmadinejad increased the conservative vote by 113 percent compared with the 2005 election, there is little correlation at the provincial level between the increase in turnout and the swing to the president.

"This challenges the notion that Ahmadinejad's victory was due to the massive participation of a previously silent conservative majority," said the study.

The research found that turnout in two provinces, Mazandaran and Yazd, was more than 100 percent. The practice of using identity documents of dead people to cast additional ballots is a common and widespread problem in Iran, said the report.

The Guardian Council, which certifies election results, acknowledged Monday that more votes were cast in 50 districts than there were registered voters.

But this "has no effect on the result of the elections," council spokesman Abbas Ali Kadkhodaei was quoted as saying on the state TV Web site.

International monitors are barred from observing Iranian elections, and Mousavi has charged that representatives of his campaign were expelled from polling centers even though each candidate was allowed one observer at each location.

The Guardian Council, which is closely allied with Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has agreed to recount a sampling of 10 percent of the ballot boxes nationwide. But Mousavi has said he does not believe the council is neutral and has demanded a new election.

Many commentators have pointed to Ahmadinejad's support in rural areas as the reason for his political success. But the study said conservative candidates, particularly Ahmadinejad, were "markedly unpopular" in rural areas in past presidential elections.

Ahmadinejad has campaigned in all of the provinces, but the think tank cast doubt on the 2009 results that showed a sudden shift to the president in rural areas.

"This increase in support for Ahmadinejad amongst rural and ethnic minority voters is out of step with previous trends, extremely large in scale, and central to the question of why (or indeed whether) he won in June 2009," said the study.

-news.yahoo.com