Obama hits on the real point, the legitimacy has to be through the people of Iran. In the past we have put our interests in Iran above Iranian's interests in Iran with such catastrophic results even the "liberals" over there don't trust us. So it doesn't matter how well intentioned we are, or if we actually are working for their interests, we've so tainted our reputation over there nobody would really trust us, we'd just become a rallying cry for the Ayatollah and Ahmadinejad, and it'd pull the thunder from the protesters.

What I don' hear much of is Russia's view of all this. It would seem they have an economical interest in keeping the Ayatollah and Ahmadinejad in power. If the protests ever form into an actual revolution/civil war, I wonder what Russia would do.

If the Ayatollah wants to cut down on the violence in the streets, he should spend less money on cops and start paying someone to pick up all those rocks that are lying around.
..I'm just say'n.

>> ^lucky760:
^That's too broad a statement. I think it's more accurate to say there are cops everywhere have the potential to do the same.
But the point is true; the one thing all cops have in common is they're human.


The other difference is that it is systematic in Iran. The beatings like this are occurring only on a small scale as a warning of what is to come if the protests don't stop.

The Ayatollah has already threatened to begin cracking down on all protests with 'revolutionary force'. This is, unfortunately not an isolated incident, but punishment and intimidation meant to serve as an object lesson to all the other protesters.

>> ^conan:
I hope you do all know that those people are followers of Mussawi. It's not like he's the modern, progressive, pro-western type of guy. First of all he's just the lesser of two evils and don't forget the real power in Iran isn't the elected government but the Ayatollah, who is not elected but chosen by a group of Mullahs and stays in power until he dies.
The thing here is that there may have been manipulations in the election. That's a terrible thing and i hope those are uncovered. But even if so and if Mussawi is put in power, not much will change. There will NOT by any means be a change of course in the Iran like many seem to think.


Pro-western or patsy? Remember this is a country that remembers very, very well how the US overthrew their democratically elected government in 1953. Also in 2007, the US approved 400 million for funding covert operations aimed at Iranian regime change. Pro-western is too much to ask. I think settling for not anti-western would be acceptable.

The Ayatollah and government end up sharing power, but I agree that the Ayatollah has more power. However, remember it was the outrage of the people that causes the Ayatollah to reverse his initial backing of the election results to call for an investigation into the election.

I hope you do all know that those people are followers of Mussawi. It's not like he's the modern, progressive, pro-western type of guy. First of all he's just the lesser of two evils and don't forget the real power in Iran isn't the elected government but the Ayatollah, who is not elected but chosen by a group of Mullahs and stays in power until he dies.

The thing here is that there may have been manipulations in the election. That's a terrible thing and i hope those are uncovered. But even if so and if Mussawi is put in power, not much will change. There will NOT by any means be a change of course in the Iran like many seem to think.

Crake tried to get it going http://military.videosift.com/talk/What-is-happening-in-Iran too.

I just read up on the Ayatollah stuff and I think it's fascinating how fucked up it is and how much Games Workshop has lifted the structure to make the Undead army, complete with Supreme Leader and everything.

No, he sued the Patent Office for not giving him perpetual motion patent. The court ordered the NBS to test his pile of shit. The DC to AC converter surprisingly was low efficiency. Of course the troofers on the internet will claim that there was all this magical RF energy he made from large wires and arcing (sparks). But there is no reason if this really works that you cannot power the machine off of itself and run forever.


http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/590/is-it-possible-to-build-a-machine-that-generates-more-power-than-it-uses

JOE NEWMAN UPDATE

Some years after the preceding was first published a Straight Dope reader in Mississippi sent word that Joe was in the news again. According to the Mississippi Press, Newman said he was ordered by God to marry both his 30-year-old secretary and her 8-year-old daughter. Newman complied--God presided over the ceremony--and happily notified the world in a 12-page press release. (One copy was sent to the Ayatollah Khomeini.)

The only problem--well, maybe not the only problem--was that Newman was already married to a third woman. Authorities promptly removed the eight-year-old from Joe's home, though he said he had not consummated the marriage. Newman, who once ran for president on God's instructions, angrily declared that this shabby treatment was going to get God really PO'ed. "I wouldn't be a bit surprised if this does not result that God will place misery upon the state of Mississippi.... I can see the handwriting on the wall and the people of Mississippi had better wake up."

I've always said Butters was the Ayatollah of Rock and Rolla.

To quote our own Ayatollah Ronald Reagan, Iran should "trust, but verify" any proposed deal with the US.

Hezbollah, Hamas and all the Palestinian people have no interest in attacking Israel, that is complete nonsense.

It's not nonense, it's the truth. The Palestinian people as a majority I believe have no interest in attacking Israel. Nasrallah, the Secretary-Gneral of Hezbollah has been quoted in the Washington Post stating that "There is no solution to the conflict in this region except with the disappearance of Israel" and "I do not even recognize the presence of a state that is called 'Israel.'". That should be enough in and of itself, but Hezbollah also considers the Iranian Ayatollah it's highest authority(though they have been more independent of late), and I shouldn't have to point out the position of Iran's fanatical religious leaders. As for Hamas, I quoted several of their founders and you even admitted that their charter holds a call for Israel's destruction as central. There can be no doubt Hamas wants to attack Israel. The only thing holding Hamas and Hezbollah back is similar to what has kept the peace between Syria/Iran and Israel, the fact that Israel would win any such conflict.


Syria and Iran have watched Israel's serial human rights abuses for decades


But they have been openly and actively attacking Israel even longer, your view really doesn't explain that does it?



If you understand how the political process of a truce and a peace settlement works in reality under international law, you will begin to understand that it means the cessation of violence and the beginning of sorting out opposing political aspirations on both sides.


Yes, and you may remember how Hamas sorted out opposing political aspirations previously. Giving them more time to kill off moderates and opposition doesn't seem to be in anyone's best interests.


It was a bigger leap of faith (by a factor of hundreds) for Hamas to offer this truce to Israel than it would have been for Israel to honour it under international law.


And here I thought it was the under dog that had the most to gain from a ceasefire.

I guess some folks really do need a dictator to keep them in line.

Iranians have the Ayatollahs and Democrats have Obama.

>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^eric3579:
The band that single handily killed the big hair bands. Thank god.

Thank God? Unfortunately, it also killed my way of making a living. You may be thanking God, but it left me homeless, and without a job. Not to mention the thousands of other folks who worked in the rock cubs that lost their jobs when a ton of the clubs that hired 70's, 80's, & early 90's style cover bands closed.

Not Nirvana's fault you didn't have a vocation beyond being a hair-flicking Ayatollah of RockNRolla. \m/ \m/ Rawk!

>> ^MINK:
let's ignore the many decades of western powers fucking around in that region because it powers their wars.
ffs, iraq isn't even a country, it's a line drawn by invaders.
no american forgets their history after 100 years, so why should the iraqis/iranians/israelis/syrians/jordanians/saudis?
blah blah you debate the latest war as if it had zero context.


Mind explaining which context I should add? Hossein Khomeini, Ayatollah Khomeini's grandson, enthusiastically supported the current war and refused to call it an invasion but the liberation of Iraq. Am I to believe he too is ignorant of the region's history? In what context was Saddam not a monster the world is better off without?

>> ^ElJardinero:
What concerns me more than Iran trying to make nuclear weapons, is the fact that the USA have over 10.000 of them. They being the only country that's used them before.. they being the country that has started most wars in the last 100 years. It's like watching a serial murderer taking a a pen from someone. Completely insane.


I'm going to take a wild guess that you are from somewhere like the US or UK rather than one of the nations they condemn like Iraq, Syria or Iran. The reason being your everyday Iranian has a much different perspective.

Ayatollah Khomeini's grand son, for example, condemns his grandfather and refuses to call the American presence in Iraq anything but the liberation of Iraq. In fact, Iran's own leadership is held in such contempt by their youth that if you wear a beard like the hard-liners you'll have a hard time getting cabs and are liable to be spat on.

Go ahead and condemn Bush and Cheney, for they surely deserve it(gitmo alone should have them not only impeached, but jailed). But don't destroy that by even pretending that there aren't much worse rulers out there in places like, say, Iran.

In particular, don't expect rational people to fear nukes in the hands of America more than nukes in the hands of a religious dictatorship that denies the holocaust and routinely gives speeches calling for 'Death to Israel!'.

I am very uncomfortable with Obama's attitude toward Iran. However, I have to say that I think he's more likely to avoid war with Iran than McCain is. Mccain, if elected would try to open any talks with Ahmadinejad (or whoever the Iranian president at the time might be.).

This is not going to be an effective way to prevent Iranian nuclear weapons research. Ahmadinejad is NOT in charge of the nuclear program. That is under the direct oversight of one of Ahmadinejad's political opponents, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei. The President of Iran has no jurisdiction over that area.

It has been proposed that one of the reasons the Clinton administration had so little luck in preventing Iranian nuclear research was that they approached the President rather than the Supreme Leader. As Vladimir Putin's talks with the Ayatollah show, the only way to get anything done with regard to Iranian nuclear research is to deal with Khamenei directly.

While Obama has never directly stated that he would talk with Khamenei instead of Ahmadinejad, it can be implied from his public statements on the matter. Obama has explicitly avoided saying that his talks would be with Ahmadinejad, and has reminded the press that "President Ahmadinejad is not the leader of Iran." The only reasonable interpretation of Obama's words is that he wants to talk with the Leader of Iran.

In contrast, McCain's response sent the impression that he's completely unaware of the Supreme Leader and the broad constitutional powers granted to the holder of that office. If McCain is elected, any talks with Iran would follow policies that have been proven ineffective.