• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Iran students storm UK Embassy

cpwill said:
not to mention a little organization called Hezbollah.

that being said, i would like to emphasize that There Is Nothing To See Here. the Iranian Government Is Made Up Of Civilized, Rational Actors, And Ergo Would Of Course Never Countenance Or Encourage This Kind Of Assault By Deniable Elements. Ergo, These People Can Be Trusted Not To Follow Through On Their Threats To Nuke Israel. Move Along, Move Along, Nothing To See Here.
Click to expand...

Whipping people into a frenzy to make them hate foreign governments and increase your own legitimacy is far different from starting a nuclear exchange.
 
Gill said:
[...] But you feel free to continue defending Iran. You are in good company with Russia, China, and North Korea.
Click to expand...
Speaking of strawmen . . . . . . and ad hominems. Signs of desperation?
 
Last edited:
There really isn't any indication that this was government sanctioned, and in fact I think that this hurts the overall Iranian government's interests. The Independent Islamic Student Association took credit for the attack, but many have suspected the activists of being Basij. This is certainly a possibility but even if so the Basij are not really a centrally organized organization with a strict hierarchy, meaning that even making a stretch and assuming this to be true that it was at most organized by a lower level group perhaps even outside of the government entirely.

Foreign Minister Salehi has said that he hopes that normalized relations will return in the near future. The Iranian government hasn't made any indication of supporting such a radical move. All signs point to a completely autonomously organized event, at the very most. Though I think it's pretty obvious that this was not organized by anyone in the government, particularly because of the police attempts to break it up.

In any event it is obvious that Ahmedinejad opposes such an action, as does Ayatollah Khamenei.
 
Last edited:
cpwill said:
[...] you people keep forgetting that Iran can nuke people at will. [...]
Click to expand...
I'd even forgotten that Iran possessed nuclear weapons... but then I return to DP, and I am reminded :lamo
 
cpwill said:
yes. Because Iran Would Never Share Nuclear Technology With Fellow Psychos.


you people keep forgetting that Iran can nuke people at will. Because Allah will protect them from counterstrike, as the Holy Cities of Najaf and Qom are key to the return of the 12th Imam.
Click to expand...

I didn't say that they like Israel. I simply said that the leaders want to remain in control. This is difficult when you prompt a nuclear exchange that would flatten your country. Theocrats rarely believe everything they say. It's all about control.
 
Deja vu all over again. Those whacky Iranians just never learn.

The Brits have already closed down their Tehran Embassy and kicked the Iranian diplomats out of the UK. Also, I hope Iran enjoys the new sanctions issued against it by the EU.

Sometimes I think Iran is trying to force someone, anyone, to throw a missle at them so they can cry to Russia and China that they need to be rescued from the big, bad West. The only country willing to risk WW3 over Iran is possibly Israel, which stands the most to lose when Iran goes nuclear. Pretty much every other country can be counted on to turn Iran into glowing green glass if it lets a nuke loose on Israel... but Israel won't be in a position to care by then.

My opinion is that this was a carefully crafted event, planned by the Iranian government in order to show how much control they have over their country by beating back the protesters... eventually... and saving the day. But it backfired badly, because nobody, including the Brits, was buying the BS that Iran was trying to sell. TPTB in Iran have to realize that the rest of the world doesn't believe every word uttered on state tv, as does their own brain-washed populace. The only way Iran will ever have the global relevance it craves is if it can form an extremist collalition with Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, and begin a systematic assault on vulnerable, non-allied countries in the region. And I don't see the US, UK, or EU, sitting back to let that happen.
 
Sometimes I think Iran is trying to force someone, anyone, to throw a missle at them so they can cry to Russia and China that they need to be rescued from the big, bad West. The only country willing to risk WW3 over Iran is possibly Israel, which stands the most to lose when Iran goes nuclear. Pretty much every other country can be counted on to turn Iran into glowing green glass if it lets a nuke loose on Israel... but Israel won't be in a position to care by then.

My opinion is that this was a carefully crafted event, planned by the Iranian government in order to show how much control they have over their country by beating back the protesters... eventually... and saving the day. But it backfired badly, because nobody, including the Brits, was buying the BS that Iran was trying to sell. TPTB in Iran have to realize that the rest of the world doesn't believe every word uttered on state tv, as does their own brain-washed populace. The only way Iran will ever have the global relevance it craves is if it can form an extremist collalition with Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, and begin a systematic assault on vulnerable, non-allied countries in the region. And I don't see the US, UK, or EU, sitting back to let that happen.
Click to expand...

And this is complete ungrounded speculation that flies in the face of reality, considering that Ahmedinejad and Khamenei are interested in closer dealings with the west and not isolating themselves.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
And this is complete ungrounded speculation that flies in the face of reality, considering that Ahmedinejad and Khamenei are interested in closer dealings with the west and not isolating themselves.
Click to expand...

Why indeed it is, since comments prefaced with statements like, "Sometimes I think..." and "My opinion..." by definition means that I am speculating. We are all speculating, including yourself, since none of us have backdoor channels to Iran's governmental elites. I dare say the second bolded statement, your personal speculation, flies in the face of everything they have said and done publicly in the past decades, including the forcible capture of 12 CIA assets last week, which will no doubt lead to those individuals never being seen again.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
And this is complete ungrounded speculation that flies in the face of reality, considering that Ahmedinejad and Khamenei are interested in closer dealings with the west and not isolating themselves.
Click to expand...

It's not completely ungrounded to believe that the Iranian government may have played a role. Speculation? Of course, barring hard evidence you can only speculate. David Cameron is speculating they did.

British Prime Minister David Cameron had earlier promised "very tough action" following the violent scenes when around 200 protesters rampaged for hours through Britain's two diplomatic compounds in Tehran.

They tore down the Union Jack, ripped up pictures of Queen Elizabeth II, trashed embassy offices, set documents alight, and briefly blocked the movements of six diplomats.

Iranian police, who initially appeared to do little to prevent the violence, eventually forced protesters to leave after firing tear gas and clashing with them, Hague said.

"The idea that the Iranian authorities could not have protected our embassy or that this assault could have taken place without some degree of regime consent is fanciful," he said
Click to expand...

So is British Foreign Secretary William Hague.

British Foreign Secretary William Hague accused the Iranian government of tacit support for Tuesday's attack by hundreds of demonstrators, though he stopped short of cutting diplomatic ties altogether.

"If any country makes it impossible for us to operate on their soil they cannot expect to have a functioning embassy here," Hague said in a speech to parliament.

To cheers from lawmakers, Hague said he had ordered all Iranian embassy staff to leave Britain within 48 hours and closed the mission in London immediately.
Click to expand...
And the chairman of the Iranian parliamentary national security and foreign policy commission didn't exactly ease concerns.

But prominent Iranian MP Aladdin Brujerdi, the chairman of the Iranian parliamentary national security and foreign policy commission, on Wednesday said "Britain is responsible for all the repercussions of its action".

"We recommend other European nations not follow the policies of Britain and the United States," Brujerdi said.

Iran's foreign ministry had earlier expressed "regret" over the incident, and a senior policeman was quoted as saying that some protesters had been arrested.

But parliamentary speaker Ali Larijani defended the protesters, saying they had been angered by the British government and "decades of domineering moves by the British in Iran".
Click to expand...

Britain expels Iranian diplomats after embassy attack - Yahoo! News

This could be a significant turning point in Iranian relations with the West. It seems almost all of the EU is considering pulling their embassies along with the UK ordering Iran to evacuate it's embassy in the Britain.
 
Dianna said:
Why indeed it is, since comments prefaced with statements like, "Sometimes I think..." and "My opinion..." by definition means that I am speculating.
Click to expand...

I was just emphasizing it, and also emphasizing how delusional your speculation is. :2wave:

Rhapsody1447 said:
It's not completely ungrounded to believe that the Iranian government may have played a role.
Click to expand...

No **** sherlock, see my own post in this thread. What is completely delusional is saying it was "orchestrated by the Iranian government" and that they are "trying to isolate themselves" or whatever Dianna said as if the entire government is behind an action that flies directly in the face of what their leaders are attempting to accomplish.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
No **** sherlock, see my own post in this thread. What is completely delusional is saying it was "orchestrated by the Iranian government" and that they are "trying to isolate themselves" or whatever Dianna said as if the entire government is behind an action that flies directly in the face of what their leaders are attempting to accomplish.
Click to expand...

Woah there, Red. I didn't attack you in anyway, I just posted speculation from British leaders and the Iranian response. I went back and red your older comment and I'm sorry for inferring you meant any Iranian government involvement at all.
 
Countries are responsible for the safety and security of foreign embassies and emissaries within their borders. This is a sacrosanct principal of diplomacy. The government of Iran is at best negligent and, at worst, culpable in the attack on the British embassy in Tehran. They should have stopped it, arrested those responsible for it, issued an immediate public apology to Great Britain and taken measures to ensure that future incidents against the British or other foreign compounds would not be tolerated. To do anything less is to condone what happened, insult Great Britain and put all other nations on alert that diplomatic relations with Iran is an unstable if not impossible proposition. Iran deserves international condemnation for the whole incident.
 
Blackstone said:
Countries are responsible for the safety and security of foreign embassies and emissaries within their borders. This is a sacrosanct principal of diplomacy. The government of Iran is at best negligent and, at worst, culpable in the attack on the British embassy in Tehran. They should have stopped it, arrested those responsible for it, issued an immediate public apology to Great Britain and taken measures to ensure that future incidents against the British or other foreign compounds would not be tolerated. To do anything less is to condone what happened, insult Great Britain and put all other nations on alert that diplomatic relations with Iran is an unstable if not impossible proposition. Iran deserves international condemnation for the whole incident.
Click to expand...

Fully agreed. It looks like that is exactly what happened.

Britain expels Iranian diplomats after embassy attack - Yahoo! News
 
Khayembii Communique said:
I was just emphasizing it, and also emphasizing how delusional your speculation is. :2wave:
Click to expand...

No more delusional than your own speculation:

Khayembii Communique said:
There really isn't any indication that this was government sanctioned, and in fact I think that this hurts the overall Iranian government's interests... Though I think it's pretty obvious that this was not organized by anyone in the government, particularly because of the police attempts to break it up.

In any event it is obvious that Ahmedinejad opposes such an action, as does Ayatollah Khamenei.
Click to expand...

It's not obvious at all. You think it is obvious. That's speculating. And given the facts I previously noted in my post, facts which you edited out, I daresay your speculation is more delusional than mine. :)

No **** sherlock, see my own post in this thread. What is completely delusional is saying it was "orchestrated by the Iranian government" and that they are "trying to isolate themselves" or whatever Dianna said as if the entire government is behind an action that flies directly in the face of what their leaders are attempting to accomplish.
Click to expand...

I never said anything of the sort. I said, "I think it's possible..." And you don't know what Iranian leaders are attempting to accomplish. You think you know, but you don't. You have simply formed your opinion just as I have formed my opinion... and neither of us have the slightest clue of what is really going on behind the closed doors of Iranian government.

I also think that you rely on insulting terms such as "delusional" to avoid addressing facts. Tip: Condescention does not improve your conversational skills and "talking at" people rather than "talking with" them does not enhance your fellow posters' mood.
 
Dianna said:
I was just emphasizing it, and also emphasizing how delusional your speculation is.
No more delusional than your own speculation:
Click to expand...

It is more delusional because my speculation was based on reality, whereas yours was not. For example, you think that "the Iranian government" is a monolithic entity and/or that they would orchestrate such an event even though it blatantly has gone directly against what their goals have been.

The reality of the matter is that the Iranian government and Iranian politics are much too complicated to boil down into a single homogeneous position. There are hardliners in parliament that support this action, just like there are hardliners in congress who support crazy crap. It is not unrealistic to believe that such a hardliner could have been involved, but their view certainly is in the minority. Your post just showed that you don't know anything about the current political situation in Iran, and instead preferred to water it down to complete irrelevance (stupidity).
 
Last edited:
Khayembii Communique said:
It is more delusional because my speculation was based on reality, whereas yours was not. For example, you think that "the Iranian government" is a monolithic entity and/or that they would orchestrate such an event even though it blatantly has gone directly against what their goals have been.

The reality of the matter is that the Iranian government and Iranian politics are much too complicated to boil down into a single homogeneous position. There are hardliners in parliament that support this action, just like there are hardliners in congress who support crazy crap. It is not unrealistic to believe that such a hardliner could have been involved, but their view certainly is in the minority.
Click to expand...

You don't know what the Iranian government's goals are. You think you know, but you don't know, because you cannot possibly know. By your own definition, that is delusional. :)
 
You don't know what the Iranian government's goals are.
Click to expand...

1. "The reality of the matter is that the Iranian government and Iranian politics are much too complicated to boil down into a single homogeneous position."
2. Foreign Minister Salehi has said the following in a discussion with Turkish Foreign Minister Davutoglu: “I hope that both we and Britain will consider this incident as if it did not happen, and that our relations will continue normally from now on.”
3. Based on WikiLeaks cables we know that Ahmedinejad is interested in compromise with the West on a variety of issues (he is in line with Khamenei on this).
4. Based on the positions that both Ahmedinejad and Khamenei have taken in the past decade we know that they are interested in opening up their economy to further privatization and foreign investment.

My speculation is based on these facts, along with a longstanding, thorough understanding of Iranian politics based on my work on this blog. So again, yes, I posted speculation, but mine was based on the facts and yours was not.
 
Last edited:
Khayembii Communique said:
1. "The reality of the matter is that the Iranian government and Iranian politics are much too complicated to boil down into a single homogeneous position."
2. Foreign Minister Salehi has said the following in a discussion with Turkish Foreign Minister Davutoglu: “I hope that both we and Britain will consider this incident as if it did not happen, and that our relations will continue normally from now on.”
3. Based on WikiLeaks cables we know that Ahmedinejad is interested in compromise with the West on a variety of issues (he is in line with Khamenei on this).
4. Based on the positions that both Ahmedinejad and Khamenei have taken in the past decade we know that they are interested in opening up their economy to further privatization and foreign investment.

My speculation is based on these facts, along with a longstanding, thorough understanding of Iranian politics based on my work on this blog. So again, yes, I posted speculation, but mine was based on the facts and yours was not.
Click to expand...

My speculation is based upon facts as well, facts you have omitted from your list. However, I see where this is going and I'm no longer willing to play. You can have the last word. You know you want it... and I think you'll insist upon it. So bye-bye. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom