Iran's Election

[Bonam]

Should have preliminary results by tomorrow. Will it be Ahmadinejad, or Mousavi? If Mousavi wins, would he have the capability to make any real changes, or is Iran still too tightly controlled by the unelected theocracy? Any opinions?

All of the candidates seem hellbent on continuing Iran's nuclear program. Would the west view an Iranian nuclear program as acceptable if it was under the leadership of a sane president, who didn't have extremist anti-Israeli views? Would it actually be more dangerous this way, as we would lose what little resolve we have to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons? Or would there be a realistic chance of dialog and negotiations actually succeeding and producing results?

[bush_cheney2004]

I don't think it matters either way, as Iran faces some very tough choices domestically and internationally. Iran's economy is a one dimensional wreck, badly needing open access to western markets and capital.

Sanctions can be eliminated and relations normalized in exchange for the monitoring of peaceful nuclear power development. The Reformers are fed up with the status quo, which holds Iran back.

[dub]

the nuclear program will continue no matter which candidate is elected. that's the only way they were able to become candidates. khamenai and rafsanjani (who is backing mousavi) have the power behind closed doors. khamenai has control over the basij and to a certain extent, iran's military, while rafsanjani (and his sons) have a lot of business interests.

iran's young population is excited about this election. mousavi is being sold as iran's obama, while ahmadinejad is being sold as the maverick whose number 1 agenda is protecting iran pride and dignity.

change in iran will not happen overnight. it will happen slowly and through international trade. this could be a good opportunity considering obama's apparent willingness to talk and flexibility and mousavi's repeated promise to be open to change.

maybe khamenai and rafsanjani have realized that they can no longer stop the momentum in iran (since the death of khomeni) and the more they try to push the iranian people and squeeze them, the more chance they will lose power.

[Borg]

No surprizes to this out come - status quo - I wonder when - and where - the first nuke test will take place?

Borg

[August1991]

The thread title refers to "elections". That's a joke.

The Iranian elections are like Soviet elections. Iran is a democracy in name only.

People who oppose the regime are arrested and tortured.

[DogOnPorch]

No surprizes to this out come - status quo - I wonder when - and where - the first nuke test will take place?

Borg

W/ North Korea blasting them off...not long at all. They already have the needed ICBM tecnology.

[KrustyKidd]

People who oppose the regime are arrested and tortured.

Kept in a cold cell and put into a box with a benign caterpillar.

The humanity!

[Strangles]

Competent candidates are weeded out by the ruling elites before the election campaign gets underway.

[Sir Bandelot]

Who knows whats really going on?

First the media said Achmadenijad would lose, he doesn't have the support of the clerics. Then when he wins they say, its because he has the support of the clerics. Too bad for them, I remember. I have a memory.

[August1991]

Competent candidates are weeded out by the ruling elites before the election campaign gets underway.

Here's is how the BBC describes this process:

But the constitution also stipulates that the people are the source of power and the country holds phased presidential and parliamentary elections every four years.

All candidates are vetted by the powerful conservative-controlled Guardian Council, which also has the power to veto legislation it deems inconsistent with revolutionary principles.

BBC

"... conservative-controlled... "? WTF? (I think the BBC used to describe the Soviet politburo as "conservative" too.)

This Iranian council is not "conservative". It is an authoritarian gang of thugs who rule by intimidation. If Maple Leaf Forum existed in Iran, most of the posters here would be in jail.

Iran is not a democracy and even if Mousavi had won, these "elections" are a sham. No one can openly question the legitimacy of the mullahs.

Edited June 14, 2009 by August1991

[Sir Bandelot]

After the propaganda dies down a little we have the chance to read between the lines, try to determine whats going on.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31351572/ns/wo...ideastn_africa/

Sunday June 14- Ahmadinejad insists the results showing his landslide victory are fair and legitimate. Along Tehran's Vali Asr street tens of thousands marched in support of Ahmadinejad, waving Iranian flags and shouting his name.

Let the people vote for the leader they want. But violent protest, destruction of property does not help the cause of Mr. Mousavi. There are indications that he encouraged the violence with his inflammatory remarks. In some democratic countries he and his party would now be arrested.

[August1991]

Vice President Joe Biden says the United States has questions and doubts as to whether Iran's presidential vote was free and fair.

"Is this the accurate response we are getting? Is this the result of the Iranian people's wishes? The hope is that the Iranian people - all their votes have been counted, and they have been counted fairly," said Biden, speaking on NBC's Meet the Press program. "But, look, we just do not know enough [to make that judgment]."

The vice president said the United States must accept Iran's official results "for the time being". But he added that careful analysis is required, and that actions taken by Iran's government do not lend credence to its claims of a free and fair vote.

"It sure looks like the way they are suppressing speech, the way they are suppressing crowds, they way in which people are being treated that there is some real doubt about that [the accuracy of vote count]. I do not think we are in a position to say," he said.

VOA

Uh, doh? Is Joe Biden really Homer Simpson in disguise?

----

Kept in a cold cell and put into a box with a benign caterpillar.

The humanity!

???

The story did not become a major controversy until almost two years later when Shahram Azam, a former staff physician in Iran's Defence Ministry, released a statement saying he examined Kazemi in hospital, four days after her arrest and found obvious signs of torture, including:

Evidence of a very brutal rape.

A skull fracture, two broken fingers, missing fingernails, a crushed big toe and a broken nose.

Severe abdominal bruising, swelling behind the head and a bruised shoulder.

Deep scratches on the neck and evidence of flogging on the legs.

Zahra Kazemi - Wikipedia Edited June 14, 2009 by August1991

[KrustyKidd]

???

You said the regime tortures dissidents. Some consider any discomfort as torture hence, the inhumanity need only reach a mild discomfort level as in a cold cell.

[Oleg Bach]

You said the regime tortures dissidents. Some consider any discomfort as torture hence, the inhumanity need only reach a mild discomfort level as in a cold cell.

We have been posioned as far as how we percieve the Persian people...look at the protests - this is a vibrant and good culture....to bad we were considering allowing the Israelis to blow them up. It would have been a waste of great human resourse as we now see. This shows that there is a great level of social consciousness among Persian youth - perhaps a higher level that Israeli youth who are much more throughly indoctrinated.

[dub]

We have been posioned as far as how we percieve the Persian people...look at the protests - this is a vibrant and good culture....to bad we were considering allowing the Israelis to blow them up. It would have been a waste of great human resourse as we now see. This shows that there is a great level of social consciousness among Persian youth - perhaps a higher level that Israeli youth who are much more throughly indoctrinated.

we will have to see how long this burning passion will continue. here are some visuals that will give a glimpse into what is happening in tehran:

photos: http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/bahramks/RiotsInTehran#

videos: http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=ahrima...os&start=60

[Sir Bandelot]

"In Washington, U.S. pollsters said a survey they had taken three weeks before the vote showed Ahmadinejad leading by a 2-to-1 ratio, greater than the declared election results.

The poll showed his victory might reflect the will of the people and not widespread fraud, pollsters Ken Ballen and Patrick Doherty said in a column in the Washington Post."

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSEVA14340720090615

You have to dig deep to find the info, as the articles headline is "Mousavi rally draws tens of thousands in Tehran". Amazing, the hype and propaganda.

But if this little snippet is true, it means that there wasn't a problem, but these people who protested and immediately became violent, they are the problem. If so they deserve to be dealt with accordingly, as any civilized country must do.

[bush_cheney2004]

....But if this little snippet is true, it means that there wasn't a problem, but these people who protested and immediately became violent, they are the problem. If so they deserve to be dealt with accordingly, as any civilized country must do.

Indeed...I think the RCMP could loan the Revolutionary Guard all their Tasers!

[the janitor]

The US just has never come up with an effective solution for Iran. Hope Obama can do something. Hard to escape the conclusion the Americans are running out of time.

Edited June 15, 2009 by the janitor

[August1991]

"In Washington, U.S. pollsters said a survey they had taken three weeks before the vote showed Ahmadinejad leading by a 2-to-1 ratio, greater than the declared election results.

The poll showed his victory might reflect the will of the people and not widespread fraud, pollsters Ken Ballen and Patrick Doherty said in a column in the Washington Post."

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSEVA14340720090615

Sir Bandelot, the link you provided contains no such quote. In any case, I would love to know how a US polling company could conduct a political survey in Iran.

Your linked Reuters article does contain this quote though:

Ebrahim Yazdi, leader of the banned opposition Freedom Movement, said Ahmadinejad's attacks on his opponents had opened a "Pandora's box" of divisions within the establishment and between the people and their government.

I love that. (Excuse my black humour cynicism.) The Western press and US government officials talk of "elections" when there are banned opposition movements.

Edited June 15, 2009 by August1991

[dub]

Sir Bandelot, the link you provided contains no such quote. In any case, I would love to know how a US polling company could conduct a political survey in Iran.

Your linked Reuters article does contain this quote though:

I love that. (Excuse my black humour cynicism.) The Western press and US government officials talk of "elections" when there are banned opposition movements.

besides a democrat or a republican nominee, can anyone else win the presidency in the US?

besides the hand picked nominee by the clerics, can anyone else win the presidency in Iran?

the end result is the same; you get to choose between who we give you.

[August1991]

besides a democrat or a republican nominee, can anyone else win the presidency in the US?

That's ridiculous.

A black guy named Barack Obama (of all names) is now the US president. In any case, people like Ron Paul and Ralph Nader can run for president. They are free to say what they want about the US Constitution and any supposed ruling oligarchs without fear of torture or imprisonment.

----

Dub, my point is very fundamental and please take note. We in the West live in liberal democracies where people are free, more or less, to say or do what they want. People in countries such as Iran are not.

One of the slogans of the people in the streets of Tehran was: "We want freedom."

[Wild Bill]

The US just has never come up with an effective solution for Iran. Hope Obama can do something. Hard to escape the conclusion the Americans are running out of time.

Actually, it is the Israelis who are running out of time. They are being put in the position of having no choice but to launch a first strike on Iran. After all, Iran has repeatedly said they are in favour of Israel being wiped from the earth. Iran has steadily been building the capability. Even if they simply intend to hold as big a stick as "the other guys" there is no way they would refrain from using it to force their will upon Israel.

It's like facing a high school bully who has promised to 'bash your head in'. Every day in wood shop you see him making progress on turning a big club on a lathe.

The teachers all tell you that you shouldn't be afraid and that the bully simply 'needs to be understood'.

Do you wait until he's finished his club?

To add to the pressure, if you listen to the teachers and they get proven wrong, no one they care about suffers from their mistake. However, if you made the mistake of listening to those teachers then EVERYONE who matters to you suffers!

Sadly, there is only one logical choice. Anything else would be counter-survival.

[bush_cheney2004]

....the end result is the same; you get to choose between who we give you.

...you left out the party primary voting and nomination process. But clerics do get to vote.

[dub]

That's ridiculous.

A black guy named Barack Obama (of all names) is now the US president. In any case, people like Ron Paul and Ralph Nader can run for president. They are free to say what they want about the US Constitution and any supposed ruling oligarchs without fear of torture or imprisonment.

the process may be different, but at the end, guys like ron paul or ralph nader will not win.

don't you agree with that?

barack seems like a genuinely nice and caring guy who wants the best for the american people but in order for him to reach where he has reached, he would have had to agree to play by the rules. the type of money he was able to raise came with conditions set by the special interest groups. same goes with a recent past president in iran like khatami. a genuinely nice and caring guy but he had to play by the rules.

don't you agree with that?

Dub, my point is very fundamental and please take note. We in the West live in liberal democracies where people are free, more or less, to say or do what they want. People in countries such as Iran are not.

One of the slogans of the people in the streets of Tehran was: "We want freedom."

i agree that we have a lot more freedom than the iranians do and i never disputed that. my comment was towards the debate about who has the opportunity to be the president of each country. at the end of it all, the americans and the iranians will choose those who have been put in front of them. because a nader or a ron paul or a ali nasiri or a (insert iranian name here) will not become the president.

[Sir Bandelot]

Sir Bandelot, the link you provided contains no such quote. In any case, I would love to know how a US polling company could conduct a political survey in Iran.

Well it did once upon a time. Now the link displays a different article.

But, I searched using the title that I copied, "Mousavi rally draws tens of thousands in Tehran"

and found other sites that still have this article. The sites show the source as Reuters.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/world/5654465...ands-in-tehran/

Same article, exact same quote. I don't know how they polled for the info in Iran. But I suppose Iran does allow visitiors into their country, at least to some extent.

The fact that the news article was pulled, or changed for some reason is a little suspicious...