Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Washington Warmongering Undermining Iranian Reform

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 9
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 template Next
  • #16
    What I find very strange about this story is that an institution supposedly committed to "defending" is out to destabilise a foreign power.

    What is even more surprising is that the inhabitants of said foreign power had a popular revolt to kick out the US 2 decades ago.

    You would think the Pentagon could take a hint like that.
    Some cry `Allah O Akbar` in the street. And some carry Allah in their heart.
    "The CIA does nothing, says nothing, allows nothing, unless its own interests are served. They are the biggest assembly of liars and theives this country ever put under one roof and they are an abomination" Deputy COS (Intel) US Army 1981-84

    Comment

    • #17
      Well, see the deal is that terrorist regimes are going down.
      Take a hint.
      Life is not measured by the number of breaths you take, but by the moments that take your breath away.
      "Hating America is something best left to Mobius. He is an expert Yank hater.
      He also hates Texans and Australians, he does diversify." ~ Braindead

      Comment

      • #18
        the thing is while I don't agree with destablizing other countries in general, when the support terrorists in a major way- that belief doesn't hold up. Terrorists supporting nations used to not bother me, but something happened that changed that. This is war- make no mistake about that.

        Comment

        • #19
          Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
          Iranian reform wasn't going anywhere, anyway, and that's about 90% of the problem.
          -While that wasn't good, going nowhere is better than collapsing to conservative opposition. If Bush does his best to destabilize Iran, the reformers are going to lose serious ground.
          "The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists."
          -Joan Robinson

          Comment

          • #20
            Isn't it possible they could gain ground?

            Comment

            • #21
              The reforms never could go anywhere because they have an unelected "senate" with veto power, so it does no good to elect a reformer president and legislature when the clerics will simply block anything they don't like.

              Comment

              • #22
                Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
                Iranian reform wasn't going anywhere, anyway, and that's about 90% of the problem.
                Still doesn't make it a brilliant idea for the pentagon ***** to ease the domestic pressure on the Mullahs.
                “Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)

                Comment

                • #23
                  Originally posted by Dissident
                  Isn't it possible they could gain ground?
                  When stability drops (but not to the point of revolution), who do you honestly think will gain ground: authoritarian clerics or reformers who have limited power and have lost their steam.
                  "The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists."
                  -Joan Robinson

                  Comment

                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Victor Galis


                    When stability drops (but not to the point of revolution), who do you honestly think will gain ground: authoritarian clerics or reformers who have limited power and have lost their steam.
                    Depends on who gets blamed. Destabilization usually means those who in power will take the heat. The West was quite successful in destabilizing the Eastern block during the 1980s. Just one reformer at leadership position was sufficient to turn the entire commie world upside down.

                    Comment

                    • #25
                      How exactly did the west destablize the eastern bloc?
                      “Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)

                      Comment

                      • #26
                        Originally posted by HershOstropoler
                        How exactly did the west destablize the eastern bloc?
                        "Mr Gorbachev, please tear down this wall!", dissidents, BBC, pictures of supermarket vs breadline, and Mercedes vs Trabant.

                        Comment

                        • #27
                          Re: Washington Warmongering Undermining Iranian Reform

                          Originally posted by Ramo

                          Shrub's policy towards Iran really has been totally disastrous. As long as the US is seen as a threat to Iran, the conservatives can prevent any changes by the reformists.
                          I don't agree, yet. What's happening in Iran has been going on for a long time, well before Bush's administration. We've seen the failure of democracy in Iran, as it is now clear that it is run by an oligarchy which doesn't give a damn about democracy. In fact the reform movement has played an important part in the operations of the mullahs, by disguising the true attitudes and actions of the regime. Thus the bad boys in Iran support terror on an industrial scale and pursue nuclear weapons and missles while the Iranian on the street as well as the international community get caught up in the melodrama in parliment. But it's the mullahs who write that script, and they only trot out poor Khatami when they have to explain something to their people or the rest of the world. I doubt that he really knows what is going on half the time.
                          He's got the Midas touch.
                          But he touched it too much!
                          Hey Goldmember, Hey Goldmember!

                          Comment

                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Lord Merciless
                            "Mr Gorbachev, please tear down this wall!", dissidents, BBC, pictures of supermarket vs breadline, and Mercedes vs Trabant.
                            We didn't make dissidents. Apart from that, right. We were essentially just sitting there, which was sufficient to demonstrate the crass inferiority of communism and see it rot away.

                            So why would you think active destabilisation is suddenly a brilliant idea now?
                            “Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)

                            Comment

                            • #29
                              Re: Re: Washington Warmongering Undermining Iranian Reform

                              Originally posted by Sikander

                              Thus the bad boys in Iran support terror on an industrial scale and pursue nuclear weapons and missles...
                              Well, why shouldn't they? If it's ok for Pakistan, what right does the US administration have to ***** about Iran? If it's ok for the US admin to blatantly violate international law, why should Iran give a ****?

                              If we take out legal and moral issues though, the Bushies have to make up their mind. Either they take out Iran's nuclear program by force, or they offer Iran something in exchage for scrapping it. Currently it looks like they really think they can talk the Mullahs out of it.
                              “Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)

                              Comment

                              • #30
                                Originally posted by HershOstropoler


                                We didn't make dissidents. Apart from that, right. We were essentially just sitting there, which was sufficient to demonstrate the crass inferiority of communism and see it rot away.

                                So why would you think active destabilisation is suddenly a brilliant idea now?
                                You think there is a lack of dissidents in Iran?

                                Do you believe that "destabilization" actually means war?

                                Roland, you need to be more creative.

                                Comment

                                Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 template Next
                                Working...
                                X