That was another win, we agree. But try to stay on topic so you can learn your lesson. I'm tired of teaching you.
Iran's hard-liners handed embarrassing defeat
- Thread starter THE_DEVIL
- Start date
Win? He's trying to foment war. If he doesn't want war, bring ALL troops home and DEFEND this country. But NOOOOOOOOO. He wants U.S. troops on Russia's border. Have you forgotten Kerry (through Obombya) was trying to fabricate a war 2 years ago in Syria. Your shrink must have fun with you. You're bat shyte crazy.
Are we at war? No, that's a win. Iran is a win. Admit it, the teams are not the same. You've been fooled. Stay on target.
As Natural said, yes and no. I expect an attempt by the mullahs to snap back, but it is the will of the people and they have to be very careful. Iran was a much more cosmopolitan nation pre-revolution, and is less repressive in many respects than our supposed allies in the region. I think this is the young, educated population saying no to the hardliners and saying they want to enjoy life again. They want stuff on the store shelves again.
The sticky thing is Iran basically has two militaries. One under governmental control and one under the control of the mullahs. The mullahs are the ones who are the s*** disturbers around the world.
Yet. We're not at war with them...YET. Sanctions are a an act of war. If he truly believed in peace, our troops would be on our border and not theirs. Instead, he's trying to start another, which would be 9.
As far as the 2 parties, every administration has hundreds in their cabinet from David Rockefeller's Council on Foreign Relations. To think that the banksters don't hedge their bets by playing both sides of the fence is sophomoric and puerile.
Stay in school, Son. But, stay out of the mind conditioning indoctrination camps aka the public school system. You're caught in a vortex.
Why aren't we at war with Iran then? If the elite control everything and they want war with Iran, why aren't we at war with them?
Just because there isn't a clearly recognized field of battle doesn't mean we aren't at war.
Killing Americans and Their Allies: Iran's Continuing War Against the US and the West.
....Many have forgotten, or perhaps never realized, that Iranian military action, often working through proxies, usually using terrorist tactics, has led to the deaths of well over a thousand American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last decade and a half. Does it make sense to risk allowing a regime that, since its inception, has been conducting a war against the United States and its allies to become a nuclear power?
Last edited:
Come down off your high horse. They are not quite the ally that you think they are.
When the government of Iran gains control of the armed force, chief judiciary, and the media from the Supreme Leader of Iran then that will be real progress. An election win is not quite the same as gaining power in Iran like it would be here.
The only thing that matters in Iran is the hard line leaders in the theocracy there. They have all the powers and all the weapons
What makes the results so truly amazing is that the conservative powers had disqualified many of the moderates from running again in an attempt to control the election. This is surprising news.
Not that we should feel much better about Iran being indirectly responsible for the deaths of Americans, but Korea and Vietnam were also surrogate wars, fought against China and Russia. This is the way of many modern conflicts and it works both ways. We killed Russians by supporting the Afghanistan insurgents.
Not that we should feel much better about Iran being indirectly responsible for the deaths of Americans, but Korea and Vietnam were also surrogate wars, fought against China and Russia. This is the way of many modern conflicts and it works both ways. We killed Russians by supporting the Afghanistan insurgents.
As was mentioned earlier, the great irony is our coziness with the Saudi regime. A brutal, medieval style monarchy whose culture created the majority of the 9/11 hijackers. Yet Iran, whose population is more young, less radical, and constantly at tension with the former repressive government, has become an enemy. Ahmadinejad is a certifiable kook, and there are serious doubts he even won re-election the first time. Iran will change, slowly and painfully, but it is changing. The Executive Branch has handled this very well. The hawks would have only weaken our hand, and strengthened the hard-liners chances.
Also, it is clear the sanctions worked. Iran's economy was hurt badly, and that is a BIG reason the moderates won.
Also, it is clear the sanctions worked. Iran's economy was hurt badly, and that is a BIG reason the moderates won.
Read my post again -- I didn't say they are an ally. I said the people of Iran are quite open to having good relations with the West. They are one of the few countries in the area which, if handled properly, could grow into a state with friendly relations with the U.S., and act as a stabilizing force in the region.
A lot of work needs to be done, and we were set back when we invaded Iraq, but it is one of the places where we should be focusing positive efforts, not negative ones.
I just exaggerated your post like you did mine.
My post was correct in that the ruling class in Iran went from very extreme hardliners to something less - what that is no one knows and it is too early to say what the outcome of this election holds.
There has always been a segment of Iranians that wanted better ties with the West and a less powerful Supreme Council. This election gives us hope that something positive may happen but the power to effect change has not changed.
And evolution/atheism is a religion. This is a good tactic you're using. Redefine the terms and bring the opponent down to your level. Impossible to lose.
Actually Saudi Arabia has a younger median age by a couple years, they have a higher birth rate, a lower infant mortality rate, and a higher literacy rate.
I do agree with you to the extent that if Iran changes it will come slowly. While there is a segment of the society that would like stronger ties with the West just like Saudi Arabia there will also be a segment that will not.
This is pure propaganda. Who would dare go around tickling the lion's arse with a broken bottle? Iran doesn't spend 1/10th of what the U.S. spends on defense. We have meddled in the affairs of Iran since at least 1953 when the CIA overthrew the democratically elected Mossadegh. Then Washington installed the Shah and the bloody Savak. If American's don't want to be killed, maybe we should just get off their continent.
Israel created Hezbollah and Hamas. They are a big part of the problem as well.
The scoreboard says Obama is a bloody warmonger who has bombed and/or invaded 8 countries. He's not in Russia yet either. It doesn't mean he is not angling to do so. It's a chess match. Iran and Syria are in the cross-hairs of the Oligarchs. If he truly wants peace as you claim, he would pack up and leave.
Baby steps. We are allied with the Sunni Saudi's. They HATE the Shiite Iranians. It's going to happen. Just because Time Mag awarded Obombya the Nobel Peace Prize doesn't mean he stands for peace.
