If one of them succeeds, is it an act of war?

[lord of the mark]

Summary of tds post

1. Its ok that non-Islamist parties arent allowed on the ballot in Iran, since not every party can get on the ballot in the US. Nevermind that US laws discriminate against small parties, and any sufficiently large movement could get on the ballot, while non-Islamist parties would be excluded in Iran no matter how much backing they had.
2. The SCOTUS, whose members are appointed by the elected president, and confirmed by the elected congress, and which is limited to judicial matters is equvialent to bodies in Iran which are self-appointed, and which exert direct authority over executive functions.
3. Out of date, as even Islamist moderates were excluded in this last election.
4. arrest of dissenting journalists, etc ignored.

5. Mubaraks an authoritarian too.
Irrelevant to the point, which is that Iranian regime is unpopular and may be overthrown. That may well be true of Mubarak as well.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Tripledoc


Well if the nation is in danger you have to limit freedom of expression. I am sure that Indymedia is aware of that. Irans human rights record is no worse than that if the US.

No, actually, it is far, far worse.

Stop being silly.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Tripledoc


Well if the nation is in danger you have to limit freedom of expression. I am sure that Indymedia is aware of that.

WTF? What does Indymedia have to do with anything?

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by GePap


What about AA not using radar guidence, but eyeballing it?

Exceedingly useful for Helicopters. Otherwise you have to hope for a "Golden BB".

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


No, actually, it is far, far worse.

Stop being silly.

No, dont make him stop, he's such an excellent foil. Proprietor of the Docaverse?

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by Tripledoc


Kind of hard to develop a democracy when you are constantly being threatened with invasion.

Why? We pulled it off.

[Tripledoc]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


WTF? What does Indymedia have to do with anything?

The FBI confiscated their caches.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Tripledoc


Kind of hard to develop a democracy when you are constantly being threatened with invasion.

Yet Iraq, with bombings everyday, is keeping to a higher standard of freedom of expression. Ditto Afghanistan.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Tripledoc


The FBI confiscated their caches.

I presume all the Iranian journalists who have been arrested would prefer to have had their "caches" confiscated.

[Tripledoc]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Yet Iraq, with bombings everyday, is keeping to a higher standard of freedom of expression. Ditto Afghanistan.

You mean the closing down of al-Sadrs newspaper sparking the Mahdi army rebellion? The fact that only 'embedded' reporters are guarenteed secuirty. That 100 journalist have been killed in Iraq, the highest number of any recent conflict. That al-jazeera is permanently banned from Iraq.

The US is free to set up its psy ops operations. That is true.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Lonestar



You mean the British ships that didn't have any countermeasures or Close In Weapons Systems? huh! Imagine that!

AEGIS cruisers.

[Tripledoc]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
I presume all the Iranian journalists who have been arrested would prefer to have had their "caches" confiscated.

In Iran there is no universal acces to the internet. Therefore the masses cannot send deaththreats to the intellectuals if they tell the truth, like it is often done in the US by various brownshirts. So there is no balance if you will.

Freedom of expression in the US is being controlled by an all-pervading sense of fear.

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by Tripledoc


You mean the closing down of al-Sadrs newspaper sparking the Mahdi army rebellion? The fact that only 'embedded' reporters are guarenteed secuirty. That 100 journalist have been killed in Iraq, the highest number of any recent conflict. That al-jazeera is permanently banned from Iraq.

The US is free to set up its psy ops operations. That is true.

All true. But Sadr's was closed down because he's a trouble maker. Embeeded reporters are there for their own safety...a soldier and Marine is not going to put a lot of thought into it if some jackass peeps out a window with some big and black looking a block away. The Number of Journalists dead...I'm sure you know how confusing urban warfare is. Al-jeezera is group that passively supports terrorists.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Tripledoc


You mean the closing down of al-Sadrs newspaper sparking the Mahdi army rebellion? The fact that only 'embedded' reporters are guarenteed secuirty. That 100 journalist have been killed in Iraq, the highest number of any recent conflict. That al-jazeera is permanently banned from Iraq.

The US is free to set up its psy ops operations. That is true.

sadrs newspaper which was calling for violent revolution (what were the journalists in Iran accused of - criticizing the mullahs? Questioning Islam?) was closed, and later reopened, IIUC. No one in Iraq is "guaranteed" security, not US embassy personnel, not Iraqi govt officials, no one. Al Jazeera was banned when its reporters seemed to show up at sights of terror bombings almost simultaneously with the bombings -even so it wasnt permament, and even so it was only the reporters who were banned, Iraqis can (And do) still watch Al Jaz on Sat TV. 100 journalists have been killed - yup, that happens in a war zone.

Nonetheless Iraq has a lively press, which criticizes the govt, in the midst of war, while Iran, doesnt and is excused based on the "threat" of war.

[Tripledoc]

Originally posted by Lonestar
Why? We pulled it off.

No you developed a democracy after the British were thrown out because you needed to aquire Indian land, and the British wouldn't let you. And then you started to invade other countries. Canada, Mexico and so on.