Iran needs some democracy

[Hudson Jones]

On 3/27/2018 at 5:36 PM, CITIZEN_2015 said:

Interesting article about The pro-Iranian regime lobby has gone into overdrive claiming that Bolton, a former is an ultra-hawkish warmonger who will not hesitate to attack Iran.

https://www.upi.com/John-Bolton-is-a-realist-on-Iran/3231522156093/

Iran is the most repressive country in the Middle East. It executes more people, per capita, than any other country in the world. Ninety percent of all executions throughout the Middle East take place in Iran, often in public. The regime tightly controls the media and education. 

The recent uprisings in over 140 cities throughout Iran show that the people are sick to death with this theocratic dictatorship. They long for freedom, justice, democracy and the rule of law, but the IRGC and its cohorts have met their protests with the usual brutal crackdown. Around 8,000 mostly young protesters, many of them women, have been arrested. At least 14 have been tortured to death. These are atrocious crimes that Europe has chosen to ignore.

This is from your article:

Quote

Bolton has identified Iran's "Islamic Republic" as the source of terror in the Middle East and worldwide. This is why he has been willing to stick his head above the parapet and show his open support for the main Iranian democratic opposition movement -- the People's Mojahedin of Iran (PMOI or MEK). Ambassador Bolton has addressed mass MEK rallies in Paris, which always attract over 100,000 ex-pat Iranians. He has advocated regime change in Tehran as the only way to restore peace and social justice to the 80 million Iranian citizens and to end conflict across the Middle East. He recognizes that years of appeasement under Obama did not prevent conflict in the zone; it encouraged it.

Are you pro MEK?

 

[CITIZEN_2015]

On 4/2/2018 at 9:03 PM, Hudson Jones said:

This is from your article:

Are you pro MEK?

 

I am certainly not Pro MEK. That said I don't know much about MEK except what I have been told and read that MEK was an Islamic Marxist terror organization who fought against the Shah and help the ayatolahs to power (so they are guilty in the suffering of the this nation now). Then they lost the power to them and started fighting for power and once they didn't get it then they joined Iran's enemy (Iraqi Saddam) who invaded Iran and killed many Iranians (so many iranians and rightly so consider them traitors).

Recently they claimed to have changed and appears to be bribing a few US politicians for support. However, US administration and US politicians including the President know well that MEK has no support among Iranian people as is not an alternative. So if they are seeking a regime change then MEK is not an alternative and they know it but rather another opposition who many tens of thousands of demonstrators and protesters were chanting his name recently in Iran, the son of the last King and former crown prince, Reza Pahlavi. Bolton may support MEK in theory however, in practice he must be fully aware that they have no chance in Iran.

Edited April 4, 2018 by CITIZEN_2015

[Rue]

21 hours ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

I am certainly not Pro MEK.

It is the height of audacity and two faced bull sheeyat for Hudson Jones to ask you to account for you support or do not support when he clearly comes on this forum only to paste along with Marcus canned anti Israeli scripts that in my opinion are designed to incite hatred against all Jews and Israelis and would on some forums be considered trolling.

In fact there act of trying to inundate this section of the forum with anti Israeli diatribes while ignoring Muslim terrorism and violence against fellow Muslims and non Muslims is blatant.

I contend Hudson Jones supports Hezbollah, Hamas, and Muslim extremist organizations based on the scripts and code words he uses. I say the same about Marcus. So when he asks you who you support ask him why he does not have the integrity to state who he supports and what his actual name is. I tell you what, my name is not Frobisher Smith.

Edited April 4, 2018 by Rue

[Hudson Jones]

On 4/3/2018 at 3:58 PM, CITIZEN_2015 said:

I am certainly not Pro MEK. That said I don't know much about MEK except what I have been told and read that MEK was an Islamic Marxist terror organization who fought against the Shah and help the ayatolahs to power (so they are guilty in the suffering of the this nation now). Then they lost the power to them and started fighting for power and once they didn't get it then they joined Iran's enemy (Iraqi Saddam) who invaded Iran and killed many Iranians (so many iranians and rightly so consider them traitors).

Recently they claimed to have changed and appears to be bribing a few US politicians for support. However, US administration and US politicians including the President know well that MEK has no support among Iranian people as is not an alternative. So if they are seeking a regime change then MEK is not an alternative and they know it but rather another opposition who many tens of thousands of demonstrators and protesters were chanting his name recently in Iran, the son of the last King and former crown prince, Reza Pahlavi. Bolton may support MEK in theory however, in practice he must be fully aware that they have no chance in Iran.

MEK is to Iran as Chalabi was to Iraq.

Bolton is one of the architects and advocates of the Iraq war. He is also on the payroll by MEK and neo-con organizations. 

I'm not sure why you're trying to shrug his history and association off and give him a pass. I understand your hate for the Iranian regime. I don't know anyone who doesn't have a hate for these mullahs, but I really hope that this hate does not blind you to what could happen to Iran if Bolton and the neo-cons get their way.

Here is an article that sheds light into who Bolton's association with the MEK.

[GostHacked]

MEK sounds nothing more that terrorists.  Any group that goes against the current government in any nation is in the government's view, a terrorist.

[Hudson Jones]

5 hours ago, GostHacked said:

MEK sounds nothing more that terrorists.  Any group that goes against the current government in any nation is in the government's view, a terrorist.

It's more than that with MEK. It wasn't that they went against just the government, they also killed innocent civilians through bombs and explosions and of course, the military they created in conjunction with Saddam.

[CITIZEN_2015]

6 hours ago, GostHacked said:

MEK sounds nothing more that terrorists.  Any group that goes against the current government in any nation 

This is true ONLY if the group goes against a democratically elected government by any nation.

[GostHacked]

14 hours ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

This is true ONLY if the group goes against a democratically elected government by any nation.

Elected or other, it does not matter. The view is the same to me. Assad (Syria) was not democratically elected either, but we see it's ally Russia helping out while all other groups are considered terrorist groups when viewed from the current government with Assad in power.   Same with North Korea's leader, he was not elected, but anyone going against that government will be considered a terrorist.

We call those same groups rebels when they go against a government that our government does not support.  So again with Syria, our government calls them rebels, when in fact they are nothing more than terrorists. Anyone saying that western nations do not support terrorism need a slap up side the head.

Iran has had their share of terror attacks over the past decade, some of which I had posted here.

[CITIZEN_2015]

5 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

Elected or other, it does not matter. The view is the same to me. Assad (Syria) was not democratically elected either, but we see it's ally Russia helping out while all other groups are considered terrorist groups when viewed from the current government with Assad in power.   Same with North Korea's leader, he was not elected, but anyone going against that government will be considered a terrorist.

We call those same groups rebels when they go against a government that our government does not support.  So again with Syria, our government calls them rebels, when in fact they are nothing more than terrorists. Anyone saying that western nations do not support terrorism need a slap up side the head.

Iran has had their share of terror attacks over the past decade, some of which I had posted here.

Fighting back against an oppressive regime who muders and tortures and jails and rapes and beats its own citizens for survival of its evil exitence is NOT terrorism or rebellion. Maybe the dictatorship in power calls them such names but everyone in the world knows well they are freedom fighters and nationalists risking their lives in order to free their homeland from blood sucking vampires.

[marcus]

1 hour ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

Fighting back against an oppressive regime who muders and tortures and jails and rapes and beats its own citizens for survival of its evil exitence is NOT terrorism or rebellion. Maybe the dictatorship in power calls them such names but everyone in the world knows well they are freedom fighters and nationalists risking their lives in order to free their homeland from blood sucking vampires.

I recommend that you look at who MEK is and how they are being funded. 

On Friday, the Guardian's Washington reporter Chris McGreal added substantial information about the recipients of the funding and, especially, its sources. As he put it, the pro-MEK campaign "has seen large sums of money directed at three principal targets: members of Congress, Washington lobby groups and influential former officials", including the GOP Congressman who chairs the House Intelligence Committee, Mike Rogers.

What makes this effort all the more extraordinary are the reports that MEK has actually intensified its terrorist and other military activities over the last couple of years. In February, NBC News reported, citing US officials, that "deadly attacks on Iranian nuclear scientists are being carried out by [MEK]" as it is "financed, trained and armed by Israel's secret service". While the MEK denies involvement, the Iranian government has echoed these US officials in insisting that the group was responsible for those assassinations. NBC also cited "unconfirmed reports in the Israeli press and elsewhere that Israel and the MEK were involved in a Nov. 12 explosion that destroyed the Iranian missile research and development site at Bin Kaneh, 30 miles outside Tehran".

In April, the New Yorker's Seymour Hersh reported that the US itself has for years provided extensive training to MEK operatives, on US soil (in other words, the US government provided exactly the "material support" for a designated terror group which the law criminalizes). Hersh cited numerous officials for the claim that "some American-supported covert operations continue in Iran today." The MEK's prime goal is the removal of Iran's government.

Link

 

 

[GostHacked]

2 hours ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

Fighting back against an oppressive regime who muders and tortures and jails and rapes and beats its own citizens for survival of its evil exitence is NOT terrorism or rebellion. Maybe the dictatorship in power calls them such names but everyone in the world knows well they are freedom fighters and nationalists risking their lives in order to free their homeland from blood sucking vampires.

Again, it's all in how you view it. But go against the government and you are labeled a terrorist. No matter if that describes you or not. Our government calls certain groups terrorists all the time, while supporting 'rebels' somewhere else. Even when a place like Saudi Arabia lops off their citizen's heads, our western governments barely bat an eye. The west does not consider the Saudi's terrorists, but the west has no problem saying Iran is a terrorist when the actions on both sides are exactly the same.

[Cum Laude]

2 hours ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

Fighting back against an oppressive regime who muders and tortures and jails and rapes and beats its own citizens for survival of its evil exitence is NOT terrorism or rebellion. Maybe the dictatorship in power calls them such names but everyone in the world knows well they are freedom fighters and nationalists risking their lives in order to free their homeland from blood sucking vampires.

I am a prepper of sorts. It is my belief that someone, state sponsored or not, is going to shut down civilization as we know it. We will not know what is happening at the end of the block never mind across the sea. Chaos is the game. Controlled chaos. When the chaos becomes uncontrolled and it will, then game over. Cyberattack.

[CITIZEN_2015]

Iran led by current regime diving into economic and political chaos while taking the whole nation down with it 6 feet under. Farmers and workers join the rest of nation and women to demand their rights and freedom and unpaid wages, meanwhile even within the system cracks appearing as former supporters including a former fraudent President writing to his leader demanding immediate reforms or fall of regime, while national currency dropping sharply by 40% in one month proving lack of confidence of nation in the regime as factories closing down every day and masses losing their jobs and farmers losing their livelihood as a result of decades of wrong policies by this regime and inflation creeping back up into double digits again and sharply rising unemployment as billions of dollars are leaving the country by scared regime mercenaries while external pressure increasing as May 12 is approaching for Trump to cancel the JCPOA nuclear agreement and re-impose harsh sanctions on Iran while Iran forces come under attack in Syria.

May be the title of this thread should change from "Iran needs some democracy" to "Iran needs regime change" which democracy, economic prosperity, political stability, peace and freedom and greatness like the pre-revolutionary golden years will ALL come back to this ancient land all with one change.

Edited April 10, 2018 by CITIZEN_2015

[Hudson Jones]

Iran does need regime change. But what kind of regime change? Through the same type of regime change that U.S. has initiated in the past (ie: Afghanistan/Iraq/Libya) or is there another way?

As history has shown, the Boltons will put Iran in a much more shittier position than they are now in.

Can Iran change without explosions and fireworks? I compare Iran now to what it was like in the past, and it seems like it is slowly moving towards the right direction - maybe? I am only going with what some of the Iranians I know are saying. But Iranians are very diverse, especially politically, and the perspectives are different.

I see a country like China and the changes we have seen in the past 20 years. Opening up to the world market forced China to change its culture. I can see Iran being able to do that as well. Especially with its highly educated population, who are already well connected to the Western world. I believe open economic channels can continue to make the mullahs irrelevant.

[CITIZEN_2015]

There has been many opportunities for reforms in the past and every single time it was blocked by unelected hardliners who have the guards, the basij and the judiciary to back them up by force and terror. Iranian people have now realized that this regime is NOT reformable it is very clear from their slogans in recent mass demonstrations. 

Iran is no China. China allowed economic reforms while keep a tight leash on political freedom. Hardliners in Iran do not allow any kind of reform since they are enormously benefitting from the current corruptions and the guards grip on vast sectors of economy. Nor will they allow any political reforms as was the case with Soviet Union and the last Shah since the slightest such reform would topple the very unpopular regime. Every day they are closing channels not opening any. The latest victim being the popular app Telegram which has 40 million (half population) audience in Iran.

Edited April 10, 2018 by CITIZEN_2015

[eyeball]

6 hours ago, Hudson Jones said:

I see a country like China and the changes we have seen in the past 20 years. Opening up to the world market forced China to change its culture. I can see Iran being able to do that as well. Especially with its highly educated population, who are already well connected to the Western world. I believe open economic channels can continue to make the mullahs irrelevant.

That sword cuts both ways. Opening up to China has changed attitudes about how we govern ourselves - we seem a lot more nonchalant about dictatorships than we used to be.  Democracy in Iran is probably just as unlikely as ever given the global political environment its struggling to emerge into. 

Edited April 10, 2018 by eyeball

[kactus]

Democracy comes at a prize and every country that genuinely wanted paid that price. Whether it was Europe during middle ages with the separation of church from state or post war countries like Germany and Japan. So to reiterate that point that change for democracy in Iran comes with the blood of Iranians fighting for their freedom not a western style democracy interjected into the culture....

Personally, I think a sub section of the Iranian society conforms to the norms of dictatorship. Despite the huge sub section of the society comprising young, affluent and educated population some of the older and more conservative tyoes only see dictatorship as a way of managing the country and daily lives. Wheyher they get paid or supported by the regime remains moot. This worked well when the late Shah  of Iran became more autocratic during the last few years of his reign and certainly true with the current drakonian measures applied by islamic theocracy that has absorbed all the learnings from failures of previous government and does not let people enjoy/ experience genuine democracy. The system applies force to silence the opposition for its own survival. This system has learned that it is only through chaos and instability that it can possibly steal a country’s wealth and deprive people from their freedom. This instability by the way is something the western governments have been meddling and still do in Middle Eastern countries to profit the corporates and arms dealers....Lest to say that the western governments do not want to see Iran either flourishing in democracy or their  future government take reaponsibility and ownership of their natural weath/ resources. Just oil alone brings Iran’s democracy in conflict with western government’s interests.

[CITIZEN_2015]

8 hours ago, kactus said:

Democracy comes at a prize and every country that genuinely wanted paid that price. Whether it was Europe during middle ages with the separation of church from state or post war countries like Germany and Japan. So to reiterate that point that change for democracy in Iran comes with the blood of Iranians fighting for their freedom not a western style democracy interjected into the culture....

 

Well that may not be true as there are many recent examples where democracy was achieved without bloodshed. Greece for example was under military rule in the 70's and now it is a democracy. Chile is another example where peaceful transition from a murderous dictator to democracy took place without bloodshed in the 90's and many other examples in Europe and South America. Interesting examples though that in both Germany and Japan used as examples democracy was achieved by foreign military invasion.

Iran society is now (unlike in 1953) ready for a western style democracy because Iran is indeed a westernised country thanks mainly to 50 years of progressive Pahlavi dynasty and recent advances in social media, satellite TVs and an educated young population forming some 70% of population. However, I do agree that in Iran because of the nature of its regime a peaceful transition is more like a fiction and a wishful thinking rather than reality and the Iran nation may indeed have to pay a heavy price with its blood for democracy, especially if there is no external political and economic pressure on the regime for respecting human rights.

Edited April 11, 2018 by CITIZEN_2015

[CITIZEN_2015]

On 4/10/2018 at 5:04 PM, CITIZEN_2015 said:

Iran nation may indeed have to pay a heavy price with its blood for democracy, especially if there is no external political and economic pressure on the regime for respecting human rights.

Speaking of economic and political pressure, EU just extended sanctions on 82 individuals in Iran for human rights violations, mainly judges, prosecutors and law enforcement officers. Maybe a good start but those violating human rights number much more than just 82 in Iran. I don't think 82 individuals no matter how evil they may be can suppress 82 million no matter how murderous they may be.

https://www.rferl.org/a/eu-extends-sanctions-on-iran-over-rights-violations/29161095.html

Edited April 12, 2018 by CITIZEN_2015

[CITIZEN_2015]

Disgusting. Shameful. Woman being wrestled to ground and beaten.

Faces of islamic republic. 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/19/video-of-iran-morality-police-wrestling-with-woman-sparks-outrage

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-43821853

 

Another recent brutal action by mercenary law enforcement in Iran

 

Disgusting. Those mercenary officers or mercenary morality people that suppress the defenseless inoccent people, especially women like this should be identified, targeted at a later place and date and punished by the suppressed nation because the regime does not do it. In fact encourages it.

Edited April 20, 2018 by CITIZEN_2015

[CITIZEN_2015]

Anti Islamic regime demonstrations continues in Iranian cities and towns this time latest in a southern city named Kazeroon. While the crowd gathering in a mosque including women shouting "Our enemies is right here in Iran but they are lying that our enemy is America". This slogan is nthing new and is shouted all over Iran telling the regime that they are the enemy not USA. Yet another crowd mostly men shouting a new slogan warning the regime that "Fear us when we will be arming ourselves soon and start armed struggle".

https://www.thenational.ae/world/mena/large-protests-return-to-the-iranian-city-of-kazeroon-1.723398

This (above) follows earlier strikes (shopped are closed all over the province) by Bazar in some western cities in Kurdistan protesting the regime policies and earlier protests in Southwest and North East Iran.

Edited April 21, 2018 by CITIZEN_2015

[SpankyMcFarland]

 

On 2018-04-07 at 1:42 AM, CITIZEN_2015 said:

This is true ONLY if the group goes against a democratically elected government by any nation.

What about democracies that oppress minorities or regions? When is resistance justified? 

[CITIZEN_2015]

11 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

 

What about democracies that oppress minorities or regions? When is resistance justified? 

If they oppress minorities for illegitimate reasons then they are not democracies. But otherwise yes government action is justified. If a government is elected by a majority then the minority has to obey it. If they start violent opposition (as an example like IRA in Northern Ireland in the 70's and 80's) then government action to oppress them is legitimate.

[SpankyMcFarland]

1 hour ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

If they oppress minorities for illegitimate reasons then they are not democracies. But otherwise yes government action is justified. If a government is elected by a majority then the minority has to obey it. If they start violent opposition (as an example like IRA in Northern Ireland in the 70's and 80's) then government action to oppress them is legitimate.

To oppress them? That is actually true of NI, Sri Lanka and many other countries. In tribally divided societies there is a constant tension between majority rule and the rule of law. Democracy doesn't do away with such problems. 

Edited April 21, 2018 by SpankyMcFarland

[CITIZEN_2015]

Well I can't comment about Sri Lanka as I know nothing. I had to google search to find out where it is lol!!!!!. The majority rule is a majority rule. Anyone disobeying it is a rebel (or if that someone resort to violent action that person is a terrorist).

Edited April 21, 2018 by CITIZEN_2015