WELCOME TO AO, MORTAL!! ![]() You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Iran | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Jun 13 2009, 06:51 PM (859 Views) | |
| Allech-Atreus | Jun 13 2009, 06:51 PM Post #1 |
|
Advanced Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm hearing nothing too concrete, but it seems things are getting really heated in Iran. Short story: Ahmadinejad declared victor in the election with 62%. Opposition leader Mousavi reportedly arrested. Thousands of young people protesting in the streets and burning things. Huge electoral fabrication alleged. BBC reporting lightly, most news coming in from twitter, videos from youtube, and updated flickr accounts (mostly Mousavi's supporters) I'm following this on multiple threads. Juan Cole has a good evaluation, though I've heard a suggestion there might be a military coup in the works. This is frankly the most exciting and nerve-wracking thing I've ever had to deal with. The possibility of a democratic revolution in Iran- and I pray to god that it is- is electrifying! |
![]() |
|
| Greenland | Jun 13 2009, 07:02 PM Post #2 |
|
post plz k thnx lol
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I doubt it will be revolution Iranian police announed even before the election that they were ready to crack down on an "Orange Revolution", indicating that Ahmadinejad was going to be re-elected no matter what. Naturally, this means that he's planned for unrest and as exciting as democracy in Iran would be, we all know that this will end with a brutal repression and before you know it Iran will be back to it's autocratic self. |
![]() |
|
| Allech-Atreus | Jun 13 2009, 07:07 PM Post #3 |
|
Advanced Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
2/3rds of the Iranian population is under the age of 30, and they want change. I'm following: http://search.twitter.com/search?q=%23IranElection http://search.twitter.com/search?q=%23iranelection http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcHT8-ps64w http://www.juancole.com/ http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/2009...ran-on-fire.php |
![]() |
|
| Allech-Atreus | Jun 13 2009, 07:29 PM Post #4 |
|
Advanced Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
some direct-line twitter feeds from Iran: http://twitter.com/Change_for_Iran http://twitter.com/IranRiggedElect I cannot vouch for accuracy, but it's more than anyone else is saying. |
![]() |
|
| Iron Felix | Jun 13 2009, 07:45 PM Post #5 |
|
Time Magazine's Person of the Year
![]()
|
I'm not going to get my hopes up too much. The Iranian regime is brutal and they'll likely crush any uprising in short order. Hope I'm wrong and the bastards get chased from power though. |
![]() |
|
| Allech-Atreus | Jun 13 2009, 07:50 PM Post #6 |
|
Advanced Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
On that note- and I promise to stop posting after this, since the most important stuff has been said, I have this article by Steve Clemons:
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/...ran_there_will/ This could be very ugly, but it could be very, very important. The destablisation of the Iranian regime will throw the entire Mid-east out of balance, and I don't think anyone really knows what's going to happen in that case. The Ayatollahs may have made a serious error in judgement, if what Clemon's contact suggests is even remotely true, and this could be a very bloody and dangerous time to be in Iran. |
![]() |
|
| The Evil Smurfs | Jun 13 2009, 11:18 PM Post #7 |
|
Blue Nazi Devil
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It's pretty clear to me that Ahmadinnerplate stole the election; results came in just too quickly for paper ballots that needed to be counted by hand. Of course, I don't see how it matters. The clerics still wield ultimate power, so the president is little more than a figure head and mouth piece anyway. The previous president was a "reformer" and was utterly cock-blocked by the clerics. |
![]() |
|
| qumkent | Jun 14 2009, 04:09 AM Post #8 |
|
NOT AN AO MEMBER!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I must say I do think this is just the visible signs of a battle for power going on between the Ayatollahs. Ahmedinejad has always seemed like some lunatical Taxi driver to me and middle class Urban Iranians seem to have been deeply embarrassed by him from the start. He has a lot of support in rural Iran, but Iran is an overwhelmingly urban country and alienating the urban youth of Iran brought down the Shah. |
![]() |
|
| Kenny | Jun 14 2009, 10:02 AM Post #9 |
|
King of California
![]()
|
lol "reformist". |
![]() |
|
| Allech-Atreus | Jun 14 2009, 11:56 AM Post #10 |
|
Advanced Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The difference between a reformist and a conservative in Iran is a very small one. But I, for one, would rather have an Iranian president with the youth support and democratic overtones than a half-mad anti-Semite who's the plaything of Ali Khamenei. |
![]() |
|
| Douria | Jun 14 2009, 02:22 PM Post #11 |
|
The Jester
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Moderates in Iran: We will pursue peaceful nuclear technology. There is no reason why we can't use nuclear power in a peaceful way. Conservatives in Iran: I will do whatever I damn well please. More nukes for everyone. Also, I really really really wish Israel didn't exist. How long till we have nukes again? There is a remarkable difference. One is isolationist(in an "Arab world" kind of way,") while the other is more than willing to engage in diplomacy. One would like to see real democracy in Iran, while the other sees it as an annoying inconvenience left over from the Islamic revolution. I won't dismiss democracy in Iran, it was heartening to see the sea of reformist green and the crowds of people who supported any of the candidates. Democracy is failing in Iran, but it is not broken yet. Mousavi's fate and the end result of this stolen election will tell us how far gone it really is. If Ahmadinejad had truely won the election, I'd have been happy for democracy. He did not, I fear. I was surprised the Guardian Council even let Mousavi run. A bit of research though indicates a flawless revolutionary record, which means it'd be near impossible to reconcile a disqualification with reality. Instead the government just switched the vote tallies, as far as I can see. It was stupid as hell to show a landslide in Ahmadinejad's favor when everyone clearly knew Mousavi was the one gaining momentum, and that it was close to start with. Lets wait and see before we pass judgement. |
![]() |
|
| Kenny | Jun 14 2009, 05:07 PM Post #12 |
|
King of California
![]()
|
You can add all the artificial sweetener you like to a poison cocktail; it will still kill you if you drink it. As seen under Khatami's presidency, whatever pleasant sentiments supposedly drive the "moderate" agenda, the mullahs would still control them just as easily as they do Mahmoud, and very few reforms will actually come to fruition if they can help it.
There isn't a lick of difference between them. The reformists are just better at sweet-talking the West is all. They may differ on certain domestic and social affairs, but on all the issues that the rest of the world worries about, all Iranian leaders, reformist or no, are expected to tow the national line on nuclearization, funding Hezbollah and other terrorist groups, and maintaining Iran's stance as a steadfast enemy of Israel. I think it's pretty well established that as long as the mullahs are the ones calling the shots, Iran's "democratically elected" leaders (a term which will have to be much more loosely defined if Ahmadinejad is allowed to retain power) form nothing more than an impotent student council with no more power to shake up the school administration than the varsity mascot. Now admittedly, I don't know what Mousavi would actually do if he were allowed to govern Iran without the mullahs breathing down his neck, and I would like to see him beat the mullahs just to see what happens, but the cynic in me (the same one who voted against the "brilliant orator" Barack Obama) would await concrete actions before casting judgment, not just smooth talk.
Uhh...which I guess makes things even worse, since Iran is not an "Arab country" and most of the "Arab world" still cordially detests them. |
![]() |
|
| Allech-Atreus | Jun 14 2009, 05:50 PM Post #13 |
|
Advanced Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
This is not a repeat of the Khatami years; the main difference being the ayatollahs physically stepped in a said "no, you can't even have the farce of democracy." The ayatollahs don't like Mousavi; he's stated his support for relaxing women's dress laws and is generally fairly liberal as Iranian liberals go; the only reason he hasn't gone away in their establishment is because of his Prime Minister spot from the 80's. Mousavi had supporters in Khatami and Rafsanjani- Rafsanjani was the head of the Council of Experts, which choses the Supreme Leader. He at least has some pull in the establishment. Grand Ayatollah Sanei, who is liberal as a Grand Ayatollah can get, is under house arrest for breaking ranks and calling the elections an affront to Islam. It's not just about politicking anymore. Mousavi might not have been much better than Khatami or any more effective, but the fact that the ayatollahs and Khamenei shut the process down in such a radical way means Mousavi is now the center of the democratic youth movement. The end result might be civil war, it might be revolution. And if it comes to that, Mousavi might be replaced by someone else. Someone more liberal, someone younger. I don't know what's going to happen- but the reality right now is that people are fighting back. The government's even brought in Arab Hezbollah fighters to do crowd control! |
![]() |
|
| qumkent | Jun 14 2009, 06:13 PM Post #14 |
|
NOT AN AO MEMBER!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You would have thought that this alone would have put whoever ordered it beyond the pale with most Iranians. Surely if there's this much dispute between the Ayatollahs then some kind of serious civil upheaval is on the cards, whatever the outcome the impression Iran has given of being a relatively stable state will have crumbled. Iranians will be deeply paranoid about looking like they're on the fritz, and giving the Saudi's the edge in the Regional Power status sweeps. |
![]() |
|
| Gruenberg | Jun 15 2009, 07:19 AM Post #15 |
![]()
aka Kleinschnauzer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I kind of agree with Kenny that Mousavi's supposed social liberalism makes for a nice sidebar in The Economist (not kidding here, they profile him practically every issue) but it's questionable how much bearing compulsory hijab has on nuclear proliferation. A-A, I'm interested: why does Mousavi's youth support have so much concern for you? You're identifying a lot with being "on the side of Iranian youth"...so? Speaking as a young person, we're as capable of being politically wrong as old people are...arguably more so... |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic » |

WELCOME TO AO, MORTAL!! 


![]](http://z5.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)






11:15 AM Jul 11