No....way! I will bet you all my Star Wars dolls. But not boba fett. I never bet the fet.CameronPoe wrote:
Definitely something fishy here methinks.
It is not like public embarrasments can't get reelected but that's another story.
No Iranian incumbent has not been - ballot shortages, voting hours extended, hmmm.
Wonder how many dead from the past 6 months voted during that period.
I personally don't believe any 60+% without enhancements, his domestic program status is in shambles and that's where the public vote was focused.
Where's Carter and his no cheat team when ya' need 'em?
There's good reason for separating church and state, islam is the prime example.
No Iranian incumbent has not been - ballot shortages, voting hours extended, hmmm.
Wonder how many dead from the past 6 months voted during that period.
I personally don't believe any 60+% without enhancements, his domestic program status is in shambles and that's where the public vote was focused.
Where's Carter and his no cheat team when ya' need 'em?
There's good reason for separating church and state, islam is the prime example.
A country that truly deserves nukes.
If Israel and Pakistan have them, I don't see why not....Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:
A country that truly deserves nukes.
They are NOT dolls...they are Action Figures.usmarine wrote:
No....way! I will bet you all my Star Wars dolls. But not boba fett. I never bet the fet.CameronPoe wrote:
Definitely something fishy here methinks.
How much are all these 'czars' costing us?usmarine wrote:
well what would you call 14 or 18 however many it is czars then? kangaroo court? get out of here with that stupid crap bro. talk in present time k.
For whatever reason it seems that the ruling regime thought the incumbent Ahmadinejad would win (how they thought that is beyond me) and didn't prepare some kind of fraud in advance. When the word came down the pike that Mousavi was ahead they probably organized a hasty vote tampering without regard to how it would appear to Mousavi's supporters.
This really says something about the state of the Islamic council in Iran. They felt the need to tamper in, what is to them, an inconsequential election. This really is a show of weakness.
I'd urge those here to read this article by Juan Cole, a professor at the university of michigan, on the Iranian "election"
http://www.juancole.com/2009/06/stealin … ction.html
This really says something about the state of the Islamic council in Iran. They felt the need to tamper in, what is to them, an inconsequential election. This really is a show of weakness.
I'd urge those here to read this article by Juan Cole, a professor at the university of michigan, on the Iranian "election"
http://www.juancole.com/2009/06/stealin … ction.html
Top Pieces of Evidence that the Iranian Presidential Election Was Stolen
1. It is claimed that Ahmadinejad won the city of Tabriz with 57%. His main opponent, Mir Hossein Mousavi, is an Azeri from Azerbaijan province, of which Tabriz is the capital. Mousavi, according to such polls as exist in Iran and widespread anecdotal evidence, did better in cities and is popular in Azerbaijan. Certainly, his rallies there were very well attended. So for an Azeri urban center to go so heavily for Ahmadinejad just makes no sense. In past elections, Azeris voted disproportionately for even minor presidential candidates who hailed from that province.
2. Ahmadinejad is claimed to have taken Tehran by over 50%. Again, he is not popular in the cities, even, as he claims, in the poor neighborhoods, in part because his policies have produced high inflation and high unemployment. That he should have won Tehran is so unlikely as to raise real questions about these numbers.
...
The public demonstrations against the result don't appear to be that big. In the past decade, reformers have always backed down in Iran when challenged by hardliners, in part because no one wants to relive the horrible Great Terror of the 1980s after the revolution, when faction-fighting produced blood in the streets. Mousavi is still from that generation.
My own guess is that you have to get a leadership born after the revolution, who does not remember it and its sanguinary aftermath, before you get people willing to push back hard against the rightwingers.
So, there are protests against an allegedly stolen election. The Basij paramilitary thugs and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards will break some heads. Unless there has been a sea change in Iran, the theocrats may well get away with this soft coup for the moment. But the regime's legitimacy will take a critical hit, and its ultimate demise may have been hastened, over the next decade or two.
No wonder they are rioting.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I think it could be safe to suggest it was rigged or fiddled with, could see that coming from a mile off.
why didnt we do that? we counted chads. man we are pussies.Kmarion wrote:
No wonder they are rioting.
It sounds like now would be an ideal time to fund a reformist insurgency in Iran.
This was even more disproportionate. Let see what they accomplish . .. fire fire rarrrrrrrrrrrr!.. k now what?usmarine wrote:
why didnt we do that? we counted chads. man we are pussies.Kmarion wrote:
No wonder they are rioting.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
hey look on the bright side, they will have peaceful nuke stuff so thats something.Kmarion wrote:
This was even more disproportionate. Let see what they accomplish . .. fire fire rarrrrrrrrrrrr!.. k now what?usmarine wrote:
why didnt we do that? we counted chads. man we are pussies.Kmarion wrote:
No wonder they are rioting.
Let freedom ring.... via video/phone.
I wonder if this is why they cut off cell phone service in the capital.
I wonder if this is why they cut off cell phone service in the capital.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
well.....not sure that will change anything. its up to the tola
Who believes Mahmoud's win was "divine".usmarine wrote:
well.....not sure that will change anything. its up to the tola
That country needs another revolution. I sense one coming, too.
do we have a winner yet?
Food for thought.Because real power in Tehran is still wielded by religious leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, some say an Ahmadinejad re-election may make it easier to build an international consensus against Iran.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090613/ap_ … us_us_iran
I think we have a revolution coming on in Iran. The people have every right to do too, when a government starts rigging elections to stay in power then good old democracy won't work. Keeping in mind had they won the election less change would have occured because the Ayatollah is the one with the power. The Iranian conservatives made a mistake in rigging this election, because they've now started the downfall of the things that they hoped to protect by rigging.
Some times the sword must be chosen over the olive branch in order to protect the well being of the people. Now the only question is what will President Obama do when a full scale armed uprising begins.
Some times the sword must be chosen over the olive branch in order to protect the well being of the people. Now the only question is what will President Obama do when a full scale armed uprising begins.
in general, guns work better than swords.Narupug wrote:
Some times the sword must be chosen over the olive branch in order to protect the well being of the people.
I was being metaphorical god dammit!Reciprocity wrote:
in general, guns work better than swords.Narupug wrote:
Some times the sword must be chosen over the olive branch in order to protect the well being of the people.
Why on earth would Obama have any right whatsoever to intervene in this matter? It's not like it's Mexico or Canada that has the crisis.Narupug wrote:
I think we have a revolution coming on in Iran. The people have every right to do too, when a government starts rigging elections to stay in power then good old democracy won't work. Keeping in mind had they won the election less change would have occured because the Ayatollah is the one with the power. The Iranian conservatives made a mistake in rigging this election, because they've now started the downfall of the things that they hoped to protect by rigging.
Some times the sword must be chosen over the olive branch in order to protect the well being of the people. Now the only question is what will President Obama do when a full scale armed uprising begins.
Never said he had the right just saying that if this is a struggle for democracy, then there might be calls for just moving troops over the border from Iraq and into Iran. I think this would be a bad idea but that doesn't mean someone won't convince Obama it's neccessary, let's hope Hillary will keep this from happening.CameronPoe wrote:
Why on earth would Obama have any right whatsoever to intervene in this matter? It's not like it's Mexico or Canada that has the crisis.Narupug wrote:
I think we have a revolution coming on in Iran. The people have every right to do too, when a government starts rigging elections to stay in power then good old democracy won't work. Keeping in mind had they won the election less change would have occured because the Ayatollah is the one with the power. The Iranian conservatives made a mistake in rigging this election, because they've now started the downfall of the things that they hoped to protect by rigging.
Some times the sword must be chosen over the olive branch in order to protect the well being of the people. Now the only question is what will President Obama do when a full scale armed uprising begins.
I should hope so too. The US, and the west in general, has militarily overextended itself unnecessarily far too much at the moment.Narupug wrote:
Never said he had the right just saying that if this is a struggle for democracy, then there might be calls for just moving troops over the border from Iraq and into Iran. I think this would be a bad idea but that doesn't mean someone won't convince Obama it's neccessary, let's hope Hillary will keep this from happening.
America has. The U.K. hasn't.CameronPoe wrote:
I should hope so too. The US, and the west in general, has militarily overextended itself unnecessarily far too much at the moment.Narupug wrote:
Never said he had the right just saying that if this is a struggle for democracy, then there might be calls for just moving troops over the border from Iraq and into Iran. I think this would be a bad idea but that doesn't mean someone won't convince Obama it's neccessary, let's hope Hillary will keep this from happening.
Granted, I doubt the U.K. would be interested.