For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

06-19-2009
DarrinS

For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

in Iran...

Why do the demonstrators have signs written in English? Who are they for?
06-19-2009
clambake

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

because they're talking to you.
06-19-2009
clambake

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

i'm from n. ireland and i'm quite sure that the US is the only place on earth where english is spoken.
06-19-2009
Wild Cobra

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

in Iran...

Why do the demonstrators have signs written in English? Who are they for?

Good point.

Thing is that Iran has a vibrant history of free enterprise before President Carters policies caused political negative regime change in Iraq and Iran. The people of both countries enjoyed far more freedom than today, and it wasn't so long ago for them to forget.
06-19-2009
Winehole23

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

in Iran...

Why do the demonstrators have signs written in English? Who are they for?

The rest of the world. Farsi isn't widely read/understood.
06-19-2009
boutons_deux

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

The lingua franca of the world/business/Internet is now English.

Are you so egocentric that you think they are signs JUST for America?
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Great Moments in World History

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ronald Reagan

General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization, come here to this gate. Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate. Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!

Quote:

Originally Posted by The One

"It's not productive, given the history of U.S.-Iranian relations, to be seen as meddling ... in Iranian elections,"
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

From the front lines

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1245...s_opinion_main

Quote:

President Obama's speech was good; he says that he will support us. He also said that nations must decide the fate of their countries by themselves. I agree with him, but now we don't have any power to change the situation, so we need help and attention.

We ask the president not to accept this coup d'etat.
06-19-2009
urunobili

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

dunno but it's better to stay away from WTF they decide to do...
06-19-2009
Winehole23

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

*Tough talk* from the POTUS would give the Ayatollahs ammo against the the protesters. It doesn't help the protesters. It just makes us feel better. It's childish and selfish.

Really Darrin, what business is it of ours if Iran is free or not?
06-19-2009
boutons_deux

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

St Ronnie was all Hollywood, no substance. His "tear down" schtick was pure Hollywood, had NOTHING to with the financial/industrial collapse of Soviet Union house of cards, destroyed by the collapse in oil prices/demand in the severe early/mid80s world-wide recession and $100Bs of hard $$ wasted in Afghanistan.
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winehole23

*Tough talk* from the POTUS would give the Ayatollahs ammo against the the protesters. It doesn't help the protesters. It just makes us feel better. It's childish and selfish.

Really Darrin, what business is it of ours if Iran is free or not?

This seems to be the prevailing liberal philosophy.

I would think that the benefits of a free, democratic Iran would be blatantly obvious to anyone.
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

St Ronnie was all Hollywood, no substance. His "tear down" schtick was pure Hollywood, had NOTHING to with the financial/industrial collapse of Soviet Union house of cards, destroyed by the collapse in oil prices/demand in the severe early/mid80s world-wide recession and $100Bs of hard $$ wasted in Afghanistan.

Your little comments never add to anyhthing on this board. Just saying.
06-19-2009
coyotes_geek

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

This seems to be the prevailing liberal philosophy.

I would think that the benefits of a free, democratic Iran would be blatantly obvious to anyone.

And what would the costs be? Got a way to get Iran to become free and democratic that doesn't involve another war?

Don't you think that we've already got enough on our plate without getting involved in another nation-building campaign?
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winehole23

*Tough talk* from the POTUS would give the Ayatollahs ammo against the the protesters. It doesn't help the protesters. It just makes us feel better. It's childish and selfish.

Really Darrin, what business is it of ours if Iran is free or not?

Actually, I don't even want him to "talk tough". The dude is a master of words and I just wish he would use his gift to embolden the demonstrators. Let them know we are all watching. He kinda made it sound like we don't care who wins.
06-19-2009
Winehole23

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

This seems to be the prevailing liberal philosophy.

As expoused by Henry Kissinger, for example.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

I would think that the benefits of a free, democratic Iran would be blatantly obvious to anyone.

Go ahead, name the benefits.
06-19-2009
clambake

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Good point.

Thing is that Iran has a vibrant history of free enterprise before President Carters policies caused political negative regime change in Iraq and Iran. The people of both countries enjoyed far more freedom than today, and it wasn't so long ago for them to forget.

the shah was a butcher and you're an idiot.
06-19-2009
coyotes_geek

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by clambake

the shah was a butcher and you're an idiot.

But he was "our" butcher...........
06-19-2009
clambake

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by coyotes_geek

But he was "our" butcher...........

i couldn't have said it better :toast
06-19-2009
Winehole23

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

He kinda made it sound like we don't care who wins.

It's called diplomacy. The opposition loses legitimacy at home if it appears the US is helping them, particularly given the history of US meddling in Iran. You don't get that?

Also, Mousavi is not what you'd call a Jeffersonian democrat. He's a Khomeini crony, a former hardliner himself, and isn't "anti" the Islamic Republic. On the contrary, he sees himself as an extension of it, as does much of his popular support.
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Hopenchange for America, but not Iran.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...061803495.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charles Krauthammer

Millions of Iranians take to the streets to defy a theocratic dictatorship that, among its other finer qualities, is a self-declared enemy of America and the tolerance and liberties it represents. The demonstrators are fighting on their own, but they await just a word that America is on their side.

And what do they hear from the president of the United States? Silence. Then, worse. Three days in, the president makes clear his policy: continued "dialogue" with their clerical masters.

Dialogue with a regime that is breaking heads, shooting demonstrators, expelling journalists, arresting activists. Engagement with -- which inevitably confers legitimacy upon -- leaders elected in a process that begins as a sham (only four handpicked candidates permitted out of 476) and ends in overt rigging.

Then, after treating this popular revolution as an inconvenience to the real business of Obama-Khamenei negotiations, the president speaks favorably of "some initial reaction from the Supreme Leader that indicates he understands the Iranian people have deep concerns about the election."

Where to begin? "Supreme Leader"? Note the abject solicitousness with which the American president confers this honorific on a clerical dictator who, even as his minions attack demonstrators, offers to examine some returns in some electoral districts -- a farcical fix that will do nothing to alter the fraudulence of the election.

Moreover, this incipient revolution is no longer about the election. Obama totally misses the point. The election allowed the political space and provided the spark for the eruption of anti-regime fervor that has been simmering for years and awaiting its moment. But people aren't dying in the street because they want a recount of hanging chads in suburban Isfahan. They want to bring down the tyrannical, misogynist, corrupt theocracy that has imposed itself with the very baton-wielding goons that today attack the demonstrators.

This started out about election fraud. But like all revolutions, it has far outgrown its origins. What's at stake now is the very legitimacy of this regime -- and the future of the entire Middle East.

This revolution will end either as a Tiananmen (a hot Tiananmen with massive and bloody repression or a cold Tiananmen with a finer mix of brutality and co-optation) or as a true revolution that brings down the Islamic Republic.

The latter is improbable but, for the first time in 30 years, not impossible. Imagine the repercussions. It would mark a decisive blow to Islamist radicalism, of which Iran today is not just standard-bearer and model, but financier and arms supplier. It would do to Islamism what the collapse of the Soviet Union did to communism -- leave it forever spent and discredited.

In the region, it would launch a second Arab spring. The first in 2005 -- the expulsion of Syria from Lebanon, the first elections in Iraq and early liberalization in the Gulf states and Egypt -- was aborted by a fierce counterattack from the forces of repression and reaction, led and funded by Iran.

Now, with Hezbollah having lost elections in Lebanon and with Iraq establishing the institutions of a young democracy, the fall of the Islamist dictatorship in Iran would have an electric and contagious effect. The exception -- Iraq and Lebanon -- becomes the rule. Democracy becomes the wave. Syria becomes isolated; Hezbollah and Hamas, patronless. The entire trajectory of the region is reversed.

All hangs in the balance. The Khamenei regime is deciding whether to do a Tiananmen. And what side is the Obama administration taking? None. Except for the desire that this "vigorous debate" (press secretary Robert Gibbs's disgraceful euphemism) over election "irregularities" not stand in the way of U.S.-Iranian engagement on nuclear weapons.

Even from the narrow perspective of the nuclear issue, the administration's geopolitical calculus is absurd. There is zero chance that any such talks will denuclearize Iran. On Monday, President Ahmadinejad declared yet again that the nuclear "file is shut, forever." The only hope for a resolution of the nuclear question is regime change, which (if the successor regime were as moderate as pre-Khomeini Iran) might either stop the program, or make it manageable and nonthreatening.

That's our fundamental interest. And our fundamental values demand that America stand with demonstrators opposing a regime that is the antithesis of all we believe.

And where is our president? Afraid of "meddling." Afraid to take sides between the head-breaking, women-shackling exporters of terror -- and the people in the street yearning to breathe free. This from a president who fancies himself the restorer of America's moral standing in the world.
06-19-2009
Winehole23

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Are you capable of responding in your own words, D? I wonder sometimes.
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winehole23

It's called diplomacy. The opposition loses legitimacy at home if it appears the US is helping them, particularly given the history of US meddling in Iran. You don't get that?.

Being anti-American in Iran isn't what it used to be. The hundreds of thousands of Iranian protesters aren't chanting anti-American slogans.
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Are you capable of responding in your own words, D? I wonder sometimes.

Well, you just regurgitated the same position that John Kerry put forth in his op ed from a couple of days ago. Can you?
06-19-2009
FaithInOne

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Personally, I couldn't care less about either side in Iran. I like that Obama is not playing into this circus.

Better to be fighting each other than us :king
06-19-2009
Winehole23

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

Being anti-American in Iran isn't what it used to be. The hundreds of thousands of Iranian protesters aren't chanting anti-American slogans.

They aren't chanting pro-american slogans either. This proves nothing.
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winehole23

They aren't chanting pro-american slogans either. This proves nothing.

If you don't think the fall of Islamist radicalism is a good thing, I probably can't say anything that would convince you.
06-19-2009
Winehole23

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

Well, you just regurgitated the same position that John Kerry put forth in his op ed from a couple of days ago. Can you?

I didn't read the Kerry op-ed. I was cribbing from Buchanan and Kissinger, with whom I agree.

What I meant was, it's not always clear to whom you are responding, or what point you're trying to make, when you repost entire articles. Restating the points in your own words demonstrates mastery of the material and helps clarity. Addressing particular posters is also a courtesy and makes your own emphasis more clear.
06-19-2009
jman3000

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

If you give the impression that somehow the US is gonna help them out (which we can't/won't) then you run the risk of them doing something stupid and getting wiped out. This has already been said a billion times so here's another reason:

The fact is that Mousavi and the majority of his supporters are still anti-Israel / pro nuclear program / pro theocracy. All the signs asking Obama for help are in the extreme minority, but we see them because the media knows it will blow our mind when we see those images. So ... if we show overt support for a people who are still going to be our enemies after the dust settles... what did we accomplish?

Mousavi does want better relations with the west, but that runs against their anti Israel stance. So you somehow want us to be pro Iran and pro Israel at the same time? The only real solution to Iran is Iran. They have to overthrow their government on their own. I will agree that if they do start a revolution and things get really bad... not just bad so that Mousavi gets the presidency... but so bad that the theocracy runs the risk of being toppled... then we should lend some help. There's another layer behind this situation, which is the unelected leadership.
06-19-2009
Winehole23

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

If you don't think the fall of Islamist radicalism is a good thing, I probably can't say anything that would convince you.

Bullshit. I never said this. It's another strawman.

Statecraft isn't about upholding a moral order, it's about national interest and power dynamics. My own personal view of what's right or good in Iran has nothing to do with what it is wise, prudent or necessary for the US president to say or do. Supporting the protesters openly may tend to undermine the desired result. At any rate, it is difficult to see how official US support for Mousavi could possibly help him.
06-19-2009
Winehole23

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

For example, if we declare support, thus *emboldening* Iranians to rise up, will we be there to help them when the tanks start rolling?
06-19-2009
clambake

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

no no, Darrins said their love for americans is genuine.
06-19-2009
jman3000

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Why do conservatives want to be allies with Iran? Why do they hate Israel so much?

All this stuff is a step in the right direction... but it's still on the wrong side of the path.
06-19-2009
Winehole23

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

It's because they're Wilsonian idealists. They think it's our job to remake the whole world in our own self-image.
06-19-2009
FaithInOne

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winehole23

For example, if we declare support, thus *emboldening* Iranians to rise up, will we be there to help them when the tanks start rolling?

Yep. pat buchanan made Hannity sound like a fool yesterday on his radio show.
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by jman3000

Why do conservatives want to be allies with Iran? Why do they hate Israel so much?

All this stuff is a step in the right direction... but it's still on the wrong side of the path.

Wanting Iran to NOT be the biggest sponsor of terrorism and wanting them to NOT have nuclear capability is not hating on Israel. But that's just my opinion.
06-19-2009
boutons_deux

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

"conservatives want to be allies with Iran"

Like for Iraq, conservatives' interest in Iran is completely oily. They'd love to install another American/Anglo puppet like a second Shah.
06-19-2009
Winehole23

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by FaithInOne

Yep. Bucannen made Hannity sound like a fool yesterday on his radio show.

As recently as 1991(sic?) we encouraged Iraq's Shia to rise up, only to leave them in the lurch when they did. Ditto Hungary in 1956. Was this a smart thing to have done?
06-19-2009
Winehole23

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Was it *moral*?
06-19-2009
jman3000

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by FaithInOne

Yep. pat buchanan made Hannity sound like a fool yesterday on his radio show.

I got out of my car right before he went on. Wish I woulda heard that.
06-19-2009
Winehole23

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

Wanting Iran to NOT be the biggest sponsor of terrorism and wanting them to NOT have nuclear capability is not hating on Israel. But that's just my opinion.

This is not necessarily consistent with supporting Mousavi.
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winehole23

This is not necessarily consistent with supporting Mousavi.

What's happening there right now is about MUCH more than an election result.

European leaders have used much stronger language to condemn the Iranian crackdown. Are we further left than Europe now? If so, first time in my lifetime.
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winehole23

As recently as 1991(sic?) we encouraged Iraq's Shia to rise up, only to leave them in the lurch when they did. Ditto Hungary in 1956. Was this a smart thing to have done?

No. That was a big time mistake, IMO.
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Well, we've got this going on in Iran and now North Korea is aiming missiles at Hawaii. I guess Joe Biden was right.
06-19-2009
jman3000

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

Wanting Iran to NOT be the biggest sponsor of terrorism and wanting them to NOT have nuclear capability is not hating on Israel. But that's just my opinion.

Ultimately Mousavi has no say in either of those things.

Is he going to be better for us? Relatively yes. Is he going to bring sweeping changes to Iran? No. Is supporting this movement at this stage worth the risk of wiping out the only segment of Iran who can over throw the theocracy (that being the youth)? Fuck no.
06-19-2009
Winehole23

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

No. That was a big time mistake, IMO.

The mistake was the encouragement IMO. We couldn't have helped Hungary without risking another European war, and we were unprepared to help Iraq's Shia in 1991, so we shouldn't have encouraged them. Something similar holds for Iran IMO.
06-19-2009
Winehole23

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

What's happening there right now is about MUCH more than an election result.

European leaders have used much stronger language to condemn the Iranian crackdown. Are we further left than Europe now? If so, first time in my lifetime.

God, you're so trite.
06-19-2009
sabar

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Doesn't enough of the world hate us as it is? I believe this has already been discussed but:

1. The middle east hates the western world for messing in their area (revolutions/business takeover/imperialism/colonialism/occupation/nation-building/giving their territory for a jewish state/etc)
2. You want to mess in their area... again
3. ???
4. Profit?

The way I see it, Iran currently hates the U.K. and that's nice that someone other than "evil America" is the target for a little while. We have more than enough on our plate at the moment. We don't have the manpower to go march into Iraq/Iran/Syria/Lebanon/Egypt/North Korea/Vietnam/Cambodia/China/Russia/Somalia/Insert-craphole-here and free the entire world.

If they want to be free then they can do it themselves like we did. Like France did. Like Mexico did. Like Russia half-did.

Israel can handle the situation over there fine. One of their planes could probably shoot down most of the combined air forces of the middle east alone. That's how big the technology gap is.

Let them kill each other for a while and re-analyze the situation when we aren't fighting two wars and trying to keep Kim Jong-Il from doing anything stupid.
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winehole23

The mistake was the encouragement IMO. We couldn't have helped Hungary without risking another European war, and we were unprepared to help Iraq's Shia in 1991, so we shouldn't have encouraged them. Something similar holds for Iran IMO.

The situation in Iran is completely different IMO.
06-19-2009
Oh, Gee!!

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

in Iran...

Why do the demonstrators have signs written in English? Who are they for?

probably for us because they want our help, but we can't give them any meaningful help.
06-19-2009
Wild Cobra

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by coyotes_geek

Quote:

Originally Posted by clambake

the shah was a butcher and you're an idiot.

But he was "our" butcher...........

The only people he butchered to my knowledge were those who are now the evil Muslin groups. Severe punishment was the only way to keep them from harming society. President Carter didn't like or understand his tactics, undermined him, and now we have worse problems in the region.
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

House voted 405-1 Friday to condemn Tehran's crackdown on demonstrators and the government's interference with Internet and cell phone communications.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

I won't post the entire article, but I liked this quote:

Quote:

"When Ronald Reagan went before the Brandenburg Gate, he did not say Mr. (Mikhail) Gorbachev, that wall is none of our business," said Pence, R-Ind., of President Reagan's famous exhortation to the Soviet leader to "tear down that wall."
06-19-2009
Winehole23

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

The situation in Iran is completely different IMO.

Please explain how. Are we any more*ready* now to assist Iran's reformers if they do rise than we were Iraq's Shia in the aftermath of the Gulf War?

Remember, we are tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan, and already face volatile situations in Pakistan and the Korean Peninsula.
06-19-2009
Wild Cobra

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by jman3000

Why do conservatives want to be allies with Iran? Why do they hate Israel so much?

All this stuff is a step in the right direction... but it's still on the wrong side of the path.

What the hell are you talking about? We like the Iranian people. they are awesome. It's their fanatical government that stinks. How does liking the good people of a region mean we hate Israel?
06-19-2009
clambake

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

The only people he butchered to my knowledge were those who are now the evil Muslin groups. Severe punishment was the only way to keep them from harming society. President Carter didn't like or understand his tactics, undermined him, and now we have worse problems in the region.

i know you think that. you don't have to explain your position on any subject about anything. you're the worst kind of robot.

put me back on ignore.
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by jman3000

Ultimately Mousavi has no say in either of those things.

Is he going to be better for us? Relatively yes. Is he going to bring sweeping changes to Iran? No. Is supporting this movement at this stage worth the risk of wiping out the only segment of Iran who can over throw the theocracy (that being the youth)? Fuck no.

Like I said to WH, what's happening there is much more than just whether Mousavi won/lost an election.
06-19-2009
Wild Cobra

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winehole23

As recently as 1991(sic?) we encouraged Iraq's Shia to rise up, only to leave them in the lurch when they did. Ditto Hungary in 1956. Was this a smart thing to have done?

It was idiotic. A real big blunder by General Schwarzkopf(?) and approved by President Bush (41).
06-19-2009
clambake

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

go ahead,darrin. tell us whats really happening there.
06-19-2009
jman3000

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

What the hell are you talking about? We like the Iranian people. they are awesome. It's their fanatical government that stinks. How does liking the good people of a region mean we hate Israel?

I was being sarcastic.

Do you not see how it's the theocracy that's the problem and not just the president?

Like I've said. We should only get involved once the theocracy is in the crosshairs of the people, not just the presidentl. I think that we've gotten to used to the president being the chief of everything to be able to comprehend their type of government theocracy.
06-19-2009
Winehole23

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

The only people he butchered to my knowledge were those who are now the evil Muslin groups. Severe punishment was the only way to keep them from harming society.

Wrong. You just made this up, didn't you?
06-19-2009
Oh, Gee!!

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

The only people he butchered to my knowledge were those who are now the evil Muslin groups. Severe punishment was the only way to keep them from harming society.

he never killed a man that didn't need killing--he was the most interesting man in the world.
06-19-2009
jman3000

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Conservatives tend to like simple views on things so here goes:

I liken this to Rush Limbaugh sincerely going out and campaigning for Hillary Clinton because he doesn't want Obama. There may be a marginal difference... but either way it's not gonna be what he wants.

If he wants real change, Limbaugh is gonna want to destroy George Soros because everyone knows that's where the real strings are pulled.
06-19-2009
Winehole23

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

Like I said to WH, what's happening there is much more than just whether Mousavi won/lost an election.

For Iranians, it's about precisely that. What are you talking about?
06-19-2009
Wild Cobra

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Wrong. You just made this up, didn't you?

If I'm wrong, can you point me to a reliable source? That's how I recall the events of the times. I was already in the workforce when this occurred. I have a few more years than most here.
06-19-2009
Winehole23

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

If I'm wrong, can you point me to a reliable source?

More reliable than you? :lol
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winehole23

For Iranians, it's about precisely that. What are you talking about?

I guess I just read too much.

From http://www.time.com/time/world/artic...905459,00.html

Quote:

The simplistic paradigms of "reformist vs. conservative," "secularists vs. theocrats," "young vs. old" that have colored so much of the Western media's perception of Iranian politics no longer apply. The unrest now taking place in Iran is about far more than a stolen election. It is about the future of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
06-19-2009
Winehole23

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Sounds portentous, but that's still completely uninformative. At any rate, the future of Iran's Islamic Republic should be determined by Iranians, not by us.

This answer is still a non-response to what I said.
06-19-2009
Winehole23

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

I guess I just read too much.

:lol
06-19-2009
Extra Stout

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Ah yes, the old conservative canard about how the Iranian people are the second coming of the Founding Fathers if only we would step up and support them.

Conservative leaders lie. They lie a lot.

Krauthammer is a conniving, lying evil bastard.

Hey, see those green banners the protesters are waving? What do you think that means? You probably have no idea.

The Iranian people don't hate the American people but it doesn't mean they like our government any more than we like theirs.

The Iranian people want reform but that doesn't mean in any way, shape, or form that they want to overthrow the Islamic Republic. Most of the Iranians who want to overthrow the Islamic Republic live in Los Angeles and are related to the late Shah.

What the people want is a government that stops the corruption, stops the nepotism, stops the repression, stops abducting people, and stops sucking the life out of a populace that could make itself pretty prosperous if it had halfway decent leadership.

There is absolutely no evidence that a reform-minded Iranian regime would stop its nuclear development, cease its efforts to become the regional power, or suddenly become a friend to Israel.

The neoconservatives are interested in Iran for the same reason they were interested in Iraq: oil and Israel. One of the worst things that could happen for their agenda would be if Iran became a more democratic, more vibrant, more prosperous country. Their agenda is served if Iran is smashed and recolonized.
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Sounds portentous, but that's still completely uninformative. At any rate, the future of Iran's Islamic Republic should be determined by Iranians, not by us.

No one is saying we should determine their future.

When an important moment presents itself, I'm just disappointed that a US president, especially one as eloquent as Obama, gives such a tepid response.
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Extra Stout

Krauthammer is a conniving, lying evil bastard.

That's a pretty strong statement. Just don't say that about Iran or N.Korea. Kraut really got under your panties, didn't he?

Quote:

The neoconservatives are interested in Iran for the same reason they were interested in Iraq: oil and Israel. One of the worst things that could happen for their agenda would be if Iran became a more democratic, more vibrant, more prosperous country. Their agenda is served if Iran is smashed and recolonized.

Yeah, that's exactly what they want. :rolleyes
06-19-2009
Wild Cobra

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winehole23

More reliable than you? :lol

At the time, The Shah asked us for help. We were allies. President Carter throw him under the buss, and allowed him to be overthrown.
06-19-2009
clambake

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

At the time, The Shah asked us for help. We were allies. President Carter throw him under the buss, and allowed him to be overthrown.

:lmao
06-19-2009
Marcus Bryant

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winehole23

*Tough talk* from the POTUS would give the Ayatollahs ammo against the the protesters. It doesn't help the protesters. It just makes us feel better. It's childish and selfish.

Really Darrin, what business is it of ours if Iran is free or not?

It's "our" business in the sense that 'we' Americans presumably enjoy liberal democratic republicanism and feel the rest of mankind would be best served under some variant of the system, as it is a decent guarantor of human rights. To that end, I have no problem with the part of the world which thinks along those lines expressing support for the protestors and finding ways to shame the Iranian authoritarians.

But is it necessarily a matter for the State? I'd have to agree with you on that.
06-19-2009
Extra Stout

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

That's a pretty strong statement. Just don't say that about Iran or N.Korea. Kraut really go under your panties, didn't he?

Yeah, that's exactly what they want. :rolleyes

Yes, it is exactly what they want.

See, you deal in glib responses with which you try to deflect any cognitive dissonance which might challenge your embryonic understanding of your own ideology.

Western business interests want access and control over Middle Eastern oil. They always have. It's why Mossadegh was deposed in the first place -- British Petroleum controlled the revenues from Iranian oil, Mossadegh planned to "unilaterally renegotiate" that arrangement, Winston Churchill appealed to Eisenhower on behalf of BP, and Eisenhower sent in the CIA to foment a "revolution" and install the Shah. Of course the Shah ended up nationalizing BP's holdings anyway, but it was on terms beneficial to the U.S., and the U.K. is our obedient little lapdog so they didn't yap too much about it.

It's why OPEC was formed. Middle Eastern countries which had grown tired of the Western powers controlling all their oil looked at what happened in Iran and feared either the Western powers or the Soviets would overrun them if they didn't team up.

It's why we prop up the Saudis.

It's why we've had Presidents who literally hold hands with the oil sheikhs.

It's why we've spent 60 years tiptoeing around the Israeli-Palestinian issue.

We all know this. It's why we agonize about importing foreign oil, about alternative energy, about gas prices, about money pouring into interests inimical to the U.S. Our economies depend upon cheap energy, countries like Iran have it in spades, and if any of them ever get their act together, they will hold an awful lot of the cards and they will not play them in ways beneficial to U.S. interests, regardless of whether the bearded ayatollahs or the banner-waving students are in charge.

So American business players have a vested interest in making sure they stay dysfunctional.
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

A good article from The Nation

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090706/nichols

excerpt

Quote:

President Obama's tepid response to the evidence the Iranian election was stolen from the people of that country by current president President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his thuggish allies is disappointing.

...

The president says he entertains "deep concerns about the election" in Iran. Well, who doesn't? Expressing concern is "nice," it's "diplomatic"--in the worst sense--but it is not sufficient to the circumstance, as Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are reportedly arguing within the White House.

...

By every measure, the US president's response has been less than that of other world leaders, especially French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who has branded the announced election "result" a fraud and bluntly decried the government's clampdown on dissent "brutal," "totally disproportionate" and "extremely alarming."

It's sad when France is making us look timid.
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Extra Stout

Yes, it is exactly what they want.

See, you deal in glib responses with which you try to deflect any cognitive dissonance which might challenge your embryonic understanding of your own ideology.

Western business interests want access and control over Middle Eastern oil. They always have. It's why Mossadegh was deposed in the first place -- British Petroleum controlled the revenues from Iranian oil, Mossadegh planned to "unilaterally renegotiate" that arrangement, Winston Churchill appealed to Eisenhower on behalf of BP, and Eisenhower sent in the CIA to foment a "revolution" and install the Shah. Of course the Shah ended up nationalizing BP's holdings anyway, but it was on terms beneficial to the U.S., and the U.K. is our obedient little lapdog so they didn't yap too much about it.

It's why OPEC was formed. Middle Eastern countries which had grown tired of the Western powers controlling all their oil looked at what happened in Iran and feared either the Western powers or the Soviets would overrun them if they didn't team up.

It's why we prop up the Saudis.

It's why we've had Presidents who literally hold hands with the oil sheikhs.

It's why we've spent 60 years tiptoeing around the Israeli-Palestinian issue.

We all know this. It's why we agonize about importing foreign oil, about alternative energy, about gas prices, about money pouring into interests inimical to the U.S. Our economies depend upon cheap energy, countries like Iran have it in spades, and if any of them ever get their act together, they will hold an awful lot of the cards and they will not play them in ways beneficial to U.S. interests, regardless of whether the bearded ayatollahs or the banner-waving students are in charge.

So American business players have a vested interest in making sure they stay dysfunctional.

You know that we get most of our oil from Mexico and Canada, right?
06-19-2009
Extra Stout

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Anyone who has a basic understanding of what happened in 1953 and 1979 beyond the mendacious version fed to them by neoconservative pundits undestands full well why any President would keep mum on political protests in Iran.

I don't say this to defend Obama. I say it because it is plainly obvious to the most casual observer, and anyone who says he has a grasp of the situation and claims otherwise, like a Krauthammer, or especially a Michael Ledeen, is simply lying.
06-19-2009
braeden0613

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

So after skimming through this thread, does the OP just want Obama to denounce the Iranian government? Or do you want some type of CIA or military response?
06-19-2009
MannyIsGod

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

Wanting Iran to NOT be the biggest sponsor of terrorism and wanting them to NOT have nuclear capability is not hating on Israel. But that's just my opinion.

Shows how fucking little you know, moron. You have no clue what the reformists stand for.
06-19-2009
clambake

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by braeden0613

So after skimming through this thread, does the OP just want Obama to denounce the Iranian government? Or do you want some type of CIA or military response?

he doesn't know what he wants until he hears it.
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by braeden0613

So after skimming through this thread, does the OP just want Obama to denounce the Iranian government? Or do you want some type of CIA or military response?

No military response, but not a flaccid, limp-wristed response.
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

Shows how fucking little you know, moron. You have no clue what the reformists stand for.

Ok, so you think I'm dumb and don't know what I'm talking about. Thanks for your contribution.

I find it amusing that Obama and Pat Buchanan seem to be aligned on this issue.
06-19-2009
MannyIsGod

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winehole23

As recently as 1991(sic?) we encouraged Iraq's Shia to rise up, only to leave them in the lurch when they did. Ditto Hungary in 1956. Was this a smart thing to have done?

Yeah, we encouraged them and just watched on the sidelines as they were crushed. It was out right morally shitty. It was encouraging the child on the block to stand up to the bully and then when the bully pulled a knife we just sat back and watched as he used it on the child.

Are Darrin, Krauthammer, and the rest of the moronic neocons advocating the US military step into help the reformists when they get slaughtered by the Iranian government? I seriously fucking doubt it.
06-19-2009
MannyIsGod

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

Ok, so you think I'm dumb and don't know what I'm talking about. Thanks for your contribution.

I find it amusing that Obama and Pat Buchanan seem to be aligned on this issue.

Oh I know for a fact you have no clue what you're talking about. So does anyone else that reads your posts. I feel no obligation to contribute anything to someone like you who can't be bothered to find out the facts on a situation BEFORE they open their mouth. You just instantly react based on your perceptions of said situation regardless of what is actually going on.

Neocons have learned nothing from Iraq.
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

Are Darrin, Krauthammer, and the rest of the moronic neocons advocating the US military step into help the reformists when they get slaughtered by the Iranian government? I seriously fucking doubt it.

It's not only conservatives (or neocons, i.e. Jew lovers) that are critical of how Obama is handling this. Go read that article from The Nation -- hardly a conservative mag.
06-19-2009
Extra Stout

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

You know that we get most of our oil from Mexico and Canada, right?

Oil is a fungible commodity.

It makes absolutely no difference where we get our oil from --- as long as somebody wants Middle Eastern oil and is willing to pay for it, controlling those revenue streams is extraordinarily profitable, and Western businesses would much rather they get those profits than somebody else.

I swear, it would be easier to explain this to a kindergartener.

DarrinS, congratulations, you are the quintessential example of an American conservative in 2009. You have negligible understanding of anything about the world further away than the front of your nose, so much so that you can't even scratch the surface of grasping the depths of your ignorance, yet you are so arrogant as to assume you have it all figured out, complete with pithy catchphrases. In fact, you have to deal in content-free single-sentence responses, because on top of your apoplexy-inducing stupidity, you have the attention span of a gnat.

It's astounding. Calvin Coolidge once quipped, "The ability of the human mind to resist knowledge is astounding," itself a pithy catchphrase, except that in this case it is possibly the truest assemblage of words ever uttered.

I need to stop trying to explain things to these morons or I'm going to have a nervous breakdown and end up like whottt.
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

Oh I know for a fact you have no clue what you're talking about. So does anyone else that reads your posts. I feel no obligation to contribute anything to someone like you who can't be bothered to find out the facts on a situation BEFORE they open their mouth. You just instantly react based on your perceptions of said situation regardless of what is actually going on.

Neocons have learned nothing from Iraq.

So what are the facts? Enlighten us. :wakeup
06-19-2009
DarrinS

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Extra Stout

Oil is a fungible commodity.

It makes absolutely no difference where we get our oil from --- as long as somebody wants Middle Eastern oil and is willing to pay for it, controlling those revenue streams is extraordinarily profitable, and Western businesses would much rather they get those profits than somebody else.

I swear, it would be easier to explain this to a kindergartener.

DarrinS, congratulations, you are the quintessential example of an American conservative in 2009. You have negligible understanding of anything about the world further away than the front of your nose, so much so that you can't even scratch the surface of grasping the depths of your ignorance, yet you are so arrogant as to assume you have it all figured out, complete with pithy catchphrases. In fact, you have to deal in content-free single-sentence responses, because on top of your apoplexy-inducing stupidity, you have the attention span of a gnat.

It's astounding. Calvin Coolidge once quipped, "The ability of the human mind to resist knowledge is astounding," itself a pithy catchphrase, except that in this case it is possibly the truest assemblage of words ever uttered.

I need to stop trying to explain things to these morons or I'm going to have a nervous breakdown and end up like whottt.

You're like Manny, only with a thesaurus. Fancy words don't always help an argument. Neither do insults.
06-19-2009
JoeChalupa

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

Ok, so you think I'm dumb and don't know what I'm talking about. Thanks for your contribution.

I find it amusing that Obama and Pat Buchanan seem to be aligned on this issue.

I'm with Buchanan on this issue but it the issue is a target for republicans either way. If Obama speaks out then they will say he is being reckless and could cause the deaths of innocent lives...if he doesn't then he is accused of having a limp-wristed response.
Either way the right will go against what Obama does. No matter what.
06-19-2009
Extra Stout

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

What this is about with regards to Obama is that it is the job of the opposition to oppose, so obviously any response he makes should be criticized as the wrong one. It's not the job of the Republican Party to make a Democratic President look good (though they might end up doing so unwittingly).
06-19-2009
Extra Stout

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

You're like Manny, only with a thesaurus. Fancy words don't always help an argument. Neither do insults.

I think that if Manny and I are agreeing on something, given how rare that is, it probably means we have judged correctly.
06-19-2009
MannyIsGod

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Extra Stout

Anyone who has a basic understanding of what happened in 1953 and 1979 beyond the mendacious version fed to them by neoconservative pundits undestands full well why any President would keep mum on political protests in Iran.

I don't say this to defend Obama. I say it because it is plainly obvious to the most casual observer, and anyone who says he has a grasp of the situation and claims otherwise, like a Krauthammer, or especially a Michael Ledeen, is simply lying.

And people are foolish if they don't realize how much 1953 is still in the mind of modern day Persians.
06-19-2009
JoeChalupa

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Extra Stout

What this is about with regards to Obama is that it is the job of the opposition to oppose, so obviously any response he makes should be criticized as the wrong one. It's not the job of the Republican Party to make a Democratic President look good (though they might end up doing so unwittingly).

That is why I like Joe Scarborough and other conservatives who don't think that it is the job of the opposition to oppose everything a member of the other party proposes.
06-19-2009
MannyIsGod

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

So what are the facts? Enlighten us. :wakeup

The facts? Moussaive is not pro Israel as you somehow managed to believe. He's not anti nuclear program as you somehow think. He's not anything you've made him out to be. Those are the facts.

You have no understanding what this is about and who the people are supporting it. Not everyone wants to be America, Darrin.
06-19-2009
Extra Stout

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

To spell it out for the uninitiated, the moment an American President opens his mouth in support of the protesters, the mullahs can just say, "Ah, see, they are simply puppets of the Americans, just like in 1953," and the protest movement will lose support.
06-19-2009
Extra Stout

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

So what are the facts? Enlighten us. :wakeup

Oh, please. The history behind what has been going on has been spelled out over and over again in this very thread. The facts simply bounce off your thick head because you don't want to hear them.

"I've made up my mind -- don't confuse me with the facts!!!"
06-19-2009
JoeChalupa

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Extra Stout

To spell it out for the uninitiated, the moment an American President opens his mouth in support of the protesters, the mullahs can just say, "Ah, see, they are simply puppets of the Americans, just like in 1953," and the protest movement will lose support.

I concur. :tu
06-19-2009
MannyIsGod

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrinS

You're like Manny, only with a thesaurus. Fancy words don't always help an argument. Neither do insults.

But your obvious lack of correct information does, right? I mean as long as you keep posting articles you agree with (how you agree with something when you don't understand it is beyond me) then you're obviously winning the argument no matter how many people tell you that you're wrong.

Did you see the Supreme Leader's speech this morning? Did you see him try to paint the reformists as American backed? Do you realize how much more effective that would have been had Obama said the wrong things?

Do you not fucking realize how destructive that could be to the movement in Iran given the history of American meddling?
06-19-2009
MannyIsGod

Re: For those who say the US shouldn't meddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Extra Stout

To spell it out for the uninitiated, the moment an American President opens his mouth in support of the protesters, the mullahs can just say, "Ah, see, they are simply puppets of the Americans, just like in 1953," and the protest movement will lose support.

They didn't even wait for him to do it. The fucker did it this morning in his speech. He managed to spend enough time talking about America to even talk about Waco and Clinton.

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:58 PM.