Jump to content

Violence In Iran!


wulf42

Recommended Posts

Looks like things are changing in the Muslim World and for the better.......young Iranians have had enough of being oppressed by the Mullahs and their idiotic hardline Islam, looks like Al Qaeda is having problems too in Pakistan now that the Pakistan Army has turned on them!

http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersEdge...E55I22120090619

Westernization of the Arab world had taken hold and

the Young want their freedom and not the old ways of doing things....this may be the end for groups like Al Qaeda!

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 80
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Looks like things are changing in the Muslim World and for the better.......young Iranians have had enough of being oppressed by the Mullahs and their idiotic hardline Islam, looks like Al Qaeda is having problems too in Pakistan now that the Pakistan Army has turned on them!

http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersEdge...E55I22120090619

Westernization of the Arab world had taken hold and

the Young want their freedom and not the old ways of doing things....this may be the end for groups like Al Qaeda!

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories

[/quot

I agree . The hope for middle east peace is in the hands of Iran`s youth and educated. This movement has been going on for years. People want to modernize their way of life. But they still have a long way to go. The religious fanatics in charge are still stoning people to death. Especially women. God give the youth the strength.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watching CNN it gives hope that the end is near for these Hardliners once and for all.............the internet has made it possible for Iranians to contact with the world and the old timers cannot stop it....go Iranian Youth!!!

toss the old fanatical bastards out!

Edited by wulf42
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watching CNN it gives hope that the end is near for these Hardliners once and for all.............the internet has made it possible for Iranians to contact with the world and the old timers cannot stop it....go Iranian Youth!!!

toss the old fanatical bastards out!

Be a lot more blood on the ground before those "hardliners" disappear.

Borg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...the internet has made it possible for Iranians to contact with the world and the old timers cannot stop it....go Iranian Youth!!!

toss the old fanatical bastards out!

I wonder what sort of world we'd live in today if the Internet was around in 1953?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder what sort of world we'd live in today if the Internet was around in 1953?

While it's easy to look back today and say "evil USA...getting involved with coups", one has to remember what sort of world it was back then. The Soviet Union was on the march and it was the height of the "Red Threat" at home in the US. I understand Mosaddeq is a bit of a hero to the left, but still he played a dangerous game back then called getting involved in the Cold War. Nationalizing the BP Company's assets and seeking the support of the Communists was bound to make enemies. With troubles already looming in Indochina, nobody was in the mood to play around with a 'two-bit commie sympathiser'.

Plus, while history shows America's involvement, the coup was infact carried out by Iranians. The Shah...who was already monarch since replacing his Nazi symapthizing dad in 1941...merely took over power at that point.

The heavy irony is that SAVAK was generally putting the screws to fellows like Ahmedinnerjacket...ah, if we only had the internet in 1979.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While it's easy to look back today and say "evil USA...getting involved with coups", one has to remember what sort of world it was back then. The Soviet Union was on the march and it was the height of the "Red Threat" at home in the US. I understand Mosaddeq is a bit of a hero to the left, but still he played a dangerous game back then called getting involved in the Cold War. Nationalizing the BP Company's assets and seeking the support of the Communists was bound to make enemies. With troubles already looming in Indochina, nobody was in the mood to play around with a 'two-bit commie sympathiser'.

Plus, while history shows America's involvement, the coup was infact carried out by Iranians. The Shah...who was already monarch since replacing his Nazi symapthizing dad in 1941...merely took over power at that point.

The heavy irony is that SAVAK was generally putting the screws to fellows like Ahmedinnerjacket...ah, if we only had the internet in 1979.

This wasn't just any old coup the US was involved with, it was its very first, its when the US decided to become what it was most afraid of. The rest as they say is also history, repeat it if you must but at least acknowledge it correctly so you get it right.

As far as today's dangerous world goes I wonder what sort of difference a few more principles might have made?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This wasn't just any old coup the US was involved with, it was its very first, its when the US decided to become what it was most afraid of. The rest as they say is also history, repeat it if you must but at least acknowledge it correctly so you get it right.

Nope....the USA was manufacturing regime changes long before 1953.

As far as today's dangerous world goes I wonder what sort of difference a few more principles might have made?

None.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would break my heart to think of those lucky enough to wake up in medical care nursing lumps and splits of the skull cap - and broken arms and hands from defensive meaures once prone and on the gound ---To knock someone down with a single strike is acceptable --- but to beat some one when they are helpless says one thing - Law inforcement in Iran was instructed to not just arrest - but punish on the spot...in offect to convict and sentence in a period of seconds...small wonder they are resisting such a dictatorship....I* thought that the I A tola what's his name was dead ----is this the same guy that was playing God twenty years ago? I hope that God - puts him to rest - his time is over - over twenty years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

they've passed the point of no return. there will be change no matter how this uprising turns out.

this is a struggle behind doors, between rafsanjani and khamenei. both former presidents want power and both will have to give into giving more freedom to the people.

this is truly a special time. it's weapons vs internet technology. how else would the iranian people be heard and the world be brought closer to the issue? you wouldn't see this in pakistan and iraq.

Edited by dub
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Freedom craving 'fuelling Iran unrest

There is a velvet rebellion taking place. It is not a revolution yet - but it could evolve into one if the Supreme Leader and his associates do not listen to the people.

I heard with my own ears dozens of peaceful, young Iranians saying they wanted change.

Sixty percent of the population are under 30 years old. They have no memory of the Islamic revolution in 1979. Many of them use the internet and watch satellite TV. Their window on the wider world is irreversibly open.

Many of them simply want peaceful change - and in particular an end to the strict laws that govern personal behaviour in Iran.

---

They want to be able to sing and dance. They wonder why the Iranian leadership continue to ban such expressions of human joy - a ban very similar to the rules imposed on Afghanistan during the Taliban regime.

---

Many women only cover their heads because they would be arrested if they did not.

Several women I met openly complained about the religious "guidance" police enforcing the female dress code of the chador, or the hijab and "manto" coat.

One young student told me: "I like the hijab. My friend doesn't like it. I should be free to choose to wear it, and she should be free to choose not to."

Another woman said: "The hijab is not really the problem. The real problem is that men and women are human beings - they are the same, and they should have equal freedoms."

---

What so many Iranians want now is very simple. It's freedom.

A man in a crowd supporting the main reformist candidate in the election, Mir Hossein Mousavi, said: "We want the freedom to talk, and the freedom to think. We want freedom for our spirit, ok? That's not very much to ask."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8111695.stm

It seems that what is happening in Iran goes beyond a protest against the results of the presidential election. It is bigger than those who are determined to violently extinguish the flame that has been lit in the hearts of countless Iranians. The people have risen up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The day after the election, I watched a small crowd of unarmed, and very courteous Mousavi supporters being charged by baton-wielding riot police.

A few minutes later, I was in a larger crowd of Mousavi supporters who were demonstrating entirely peacefully when they were attacked by Basiji militia driving motorcycles and wildly swinging wooden batons at anyone in their path.

I saw who was stirring the violence on the streets of Tehran. It was not the unarmed demonstrators.

Another accusation from the Iranian leadership is that British "meddling" is behind some of the vote-rigging protests.

You can't prove a negative, but my sense is that the British are doing all they can to avoid meddling.

When the UK (and America) interfered before, conspiring to overthrow the democratically elected Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq in 1953, the law of unintended consequences came fully into play.

The blowback from that case of meddling is still being felt more than half a century later.

The 1953 coup led to more than two decades of repression under the Shah, and sowed the seeds of the Islamic revolution that sent Mohammed Reza Pahlavi into ignominious exile 26 years later.

I doubt the British want to risk anything like that happening again.

I would suggest that right now is the perfect time for the UK and America to seriously aknowledge how their meddling in 1953 has played such an enormous role in what's happening in Iran today. This would be a meddling of a different kind and I can't think of anything that would knock the props out from the current regime faster. There is little doubt it requires the presence of a great Satan to justify its strict hold on power and Iranians. This would do wonders for the wests standing in Iran just a time when a more open minded society is about to take root.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could someone explain to me how and why they take seriously a democratic vote ---when the structure of their system is as such...>

SUPREME LEADER (Total and absolute power able to dictate that power at will)

Then off in some lower more earthly netherland you have two political parties...a false left and a false right..in other words - they are simply figurative and imaginary.

THEN suddenly someone is offended because the wrong guys won -----THERE IS NO ELECTION - THE GODFATHER RUNS THE SHOW ---SO RELAX...IT'S QUITE BIZZARE........you have a theocratic facistic state in dream land pretending they are a representative democracy - talk about a dellusional nation. What did they expect when the results of the election did not please Mr. Surpreme Being on earth? :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would suggest that right now is the perfect time for the UK and America to seriously aknowledge how their meddling in 1953 has played such an enormous role in what's happening in Iran today. This would be a meddling of a different kind and I can't think of anything that would knock the props out from the current regime faster. There is little doubt it requires the presence of a great Satan to justify its strict hold on power and Iranians. This would do wonders for the wests standing in Iran just a time when a more open minded society is about to take root.

Like hell. Mosaddeq deserved what he got. The Shah...while leftie media has demonized him, was a pretty good deal for civilization in the area. Besides...we didn't put him into power. Iranians had a coup w/ CIA support and then let the monarchy take over. Iran profited beyond its wildest dreams via the Shah's close relationship with various US presidents/governments...until one certain president let him down.

You might think it's a good idea to kiss a mullah's azz...but not me. I want to kick them in the same area...hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that's about as poorly sanitized a version of events in Iran in 1953 as I've ever heard.

You're so confused you seem to think knocking the props out from the current regime can be achieved with a kiss on the ass. That's just plain wierd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that's about as poorly sanitized a version of events in Iran in 1953 as I've ever heard.

You're so confused you seem to think knocking the props out from the current regime can be achieved with a kiss on the ass. That's just plain wierd.

Let's hear your version. Apologizing for 1953 today to Iran's current enemy government certainly sounds like an apologist to me. Kiss away...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3070895.stm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about Madeline Albright's version instead of mine.

In 1953, the United States played a significant role in orchestrating the overthrow of Iran's popular prime minister, Mohammed Mossadegh. The Eisenhower administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons, but the coup was clearly a setback for Iran's political development and it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs.

Moreover, during the next quarter century, the United States and the West gave sustained backing to the Shah's regime. Although it did much to develop the country economically, the Shah's government also brutally repressed political dissent.

Madeline Albright

Who said apologize? I simply suggested acknowledging. I'd probably save any apologies for another time, following the truth and reconciliation phase of the West's attempt to establish normal human relations with Iran and the surrounding region(s).

As it stands right now I think the people who are protesting the current regime would benefit the most from a concilliatory gesture of acknowledgement. It would take a lot of the wind out of the regime's sails. What would the US and the UK stand to lose?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....As it stands right now I think the people who are protesting the current regime would benefit the most from a concilliatory gesture of acknowledgement. It would take a lot of the wind out of the regime's sails. What would the US and the UK stand to lose?

Hardly.....the generation who might regard such an acknowledgement are now part of the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about Madeline Albright's version instead of mine.

Who said apologize? I simply suggested acknowledging. I'd probably save any apologies for another time, following the truth and reconciliation phase of the West's attempt to establish normal human relations with Iran and the surrounding region(s).

As it stands right now I think the people who are protesting the current regime would benefit the most from a concilliatory gesture of acknowledgement. It would take a lot of the wind out of the regime's sails. What would the US and the UK stand to lose?

Any amount of "awwwww shucks" might as well be an apology.

History already aknowledges Operation Ajax...as it aknowledges the Iran Hostage Crisis. Plus...again...it was the Cold War and Mosaddeq was certainly under no illusion that his (what amounts to) theft of British property and flirting with Communists was going to cause a stir. He gambled...he lost. I suspect he thought he'd get a lot more help from the Russkies. But, they were kinda busy with their post Stalin power struggles. If it helps, Truman tought it was a bad idea, too...but he was out and Ike was in. As well...again...Iranians actually carried out the coup...so SOMEONE there in Iran didn't like him or there could have been no coup.

But...let's be clear. This is how the Shah came to initial power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,714
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    wopsas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Venandi went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...