• 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!

Rouhani's allies make huge gains in Iran elections

jmotivator said:
Yes they did! The president Khatami was a reformist who opened Iran to the west, he was defeated by hardliner Ahmadinejad when the theocracy felt threatened by Khatami and modernity.

Prime Minister/VP was held by a Reformist from 1985 through 2005.

It doesn't speak well of your grasp of Iran's history when you can't remember 12 years ago! :roll:
Click to expand...

And the theocracy feels threatened by modernity.... and they elected moderates.

But you're right. We all should long for the days where we didnt talk to Iran, and they could work on nuclear weapons all by themselves. It was so great.
 
poweRob said:
So that's your excuse for dismissing good news. It's funny watching someone preach about immaturity of others when they apparently think the only good news would be a 100% turnaround of iran in a single day.

It's like the right still hasn't figured out how to not crap their pants.
Click to expand...

Actually, the good news for the right wingers would be that Iran has been taken over by hard liners, that the Iranians are in the streets holding up little symbolic atomic bombs and chanting "death to America", and that the whole mess can be blamed on Obama.
 
jmotivator said:
Yes they did! The president Khatami was a reformist who opened Iran to the west, he was defeated by hardliner Ahmadinejad when the theocracy felt threatened by Khatami and modernity.

Prime Minister/VP was held by a Reformist from 1985 through 2005.

It doesn't speak well of your grasp of Iran's history when you can't remember 12 years ago! :roll:
Click to expand...

So the people voted for a moderate and then voted for a hardliner. And now you are crying that they voted for a moderate because you expect them to vote for a hardliner? What the hell do you want from Iran? You want them to go ahead and go full on conservative hardliner? Or are you willing to finally admit that electing moderates is a good thing? Sounds like you are pulling for the former.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Actually, the good news for the right wingers would be that Iran has been taken over by hard liners, that the Iranians are in the streets holding up little symbolic atomic bombs and chanting "death to America", and that the whole mess can be blamed on Obama.
Click to expand...

Apparently some do wish for that. And such people are the last ones on earth we should ever want in leadership positions because they are so hell-bent on finding and making enemies for us.
 
poweRob said:
Definitely not and end game but man what a great move away from religious conservatism that leads that country. The people there seem to be getting as close as they can to dropping the mullahs. Great news.

Rouhani's allies make huge gains in Iran elections

Tehran (AFP) - Iran's moderate President Hassan Rouhani won strong public backing and his reformist allies made stunning gains in parliamentary elections, partial results showed Sunday, reducing the potential for opponents to block domestic reform plans.

The reformists scored a unanimous victory in Tehran, taking all 30 seats at the expense of conservatives, including several hardline critics of the landmark nuclear deal between Rouhani's government and world powers.​
Click to expand...

WOW...... same old BS from Iran.

The Mullah's run the country, not the president.

Keep dreaming.

Until the Mullah's are killed off, and not replaced, a president has no meaning.
 
RetiredUSN said:
WOW...... same old BS from Iran.

The Mullah's run the country, not the president.

Keep dreaming.

Until the Mullah's are killed off, and not replaced, a president has no meaning.
Click to expand...

Seems like the prez is weilding some power being that it was he that pushed through the nuclear deal with the US and the mullahs didn't seem too happy about that.
 
poweRob said:
Seems like the prez is weilding some power being that it was he that pushed through the nuclear deal with the US and the mullahs didn't seem too happy about that.
Click to expand...

The Mullah's make any and every agreement, and they do not trust the US our the UK.

Not trying to be disrespectful, but you don't know Iran.

And to be honest......we caused a lot of it, along with Britain (at the time)
 
RetiredUSN said:
The Mullah's make any and every agreement, and they do not trust the US our the UK.

Not trying to be disrespectful, but you don't know Iran.

And to be honest......we caused a lot of it, along with Britain (at the time)
Click to expand...

You are absolutely right. They would never, for example, sign a treaty with the US and the UK. Or even agree to negotiate!

Or do something like release sailors who went into their territorial waters under, say 24 hours. They would clearly have to deal with the Mullahs who would never allow it.

You sure know that country inside and out.
 
poweRob said:
Apparently some do wish for that. And such people are the last ones on earth we should ever want in leadership positions because they are so hell-bent on finding and making enemies for us.
Click to expand...

Correct, and yet we keep electing them to Congress.
 
RetiredUSN said:
The Mullah's make any and every agreement, and they do not trust the US our the UK.

Not trying to be disrespectful, but you don't know Iran.

And to be honest......we caused a lot of it, along with Britain (at the time)
Click to expand...

Progress...it sucks eh?

Please present your foreign policy resume' as it applies to Iran.
 
beefheart said:
Progress...it sucks eh?

Please present your foreign policy resume' as it applies to Iran.
Click to expand...

No working policy can be established with the Iranians until they feel that they are not threatened. At the same time, the Mullah's need to stop brutalizing Iranian people and spreading proxy wars.

The west needs to re earn the trust of the Iranians. We screwed them over big time in the past.
 
Threegoofs said:
You are absolutely right. They would never, for example, sign a treaty with the US and the UK. Or even agree to negotiate!

Or do something like release sailors who went into their territorial waters under, say 24 hours. They would clearly have to deal with the Mullahs who would never allow it.

You sure know that country inside and out.
Click to expand...

Sailors for cash.....sounds pretty easy for me. Not to mention the other embargo's that were on the line.
 
RetiredUSN said:
Sailors for cash.....sounds pretty easy for me. Not to mention the other embargo's that were on the line.
Click to expand...

So what you're saying is that the intense hardline Fundsmentalist Mullahs can be swayed by cash.

Looks like they aren't as hard line as you were implying a few posts ago. In fact, they sound downright American.
 
Threegoofs said:
So what you're saying is that the intense hardline Fundsmentalist Mullahs can be swayed by cash.

Looks like they aren't as hard line as you were implying a few posts ago. In fact, they sound downright American.
Click to expand...

and there appear to be Americans who would like to see our.. no, make that their version of Mullahs having power in the USA as well.
 
Dittohead not! said:
and there appear to be Americans who would like to see our.. no, make that their version of Mullahs having power in the USA as well.
Click to expand...

Well, but those are the good Christian ones who just want to protect unborn babies, delicate white women and our freedom to worship any Christian faith we please, .
 
Threegoofs said:
Well, but those are the good Christian ones who just want to protect unborn babies, delicate white women and our freedom to worship any Christian faith we please, .
Click to expand...

Correct, or at least any Christian faith that they can approve of.
 
poweRob said:
So the people voted for a moderate and then voted for a hardliner. And now you are crying that they voted for a moderate because you expect them to vote for a hardliner? What the hell do you want from Iran? You want them to go ahead and go full on conservative hardliner? Or are you willing to finally admit that electing moderates is a good thing? Sounds like you are pulling for the former.
Click to expand...

You still aren't getting it. This election was a sham. It wasn't a victory for reformists and moderates as the ruling theocracy didn't let any actual reformists and moderates into the election.

I am saying that the Iranian people have been voting moderate and reformist for over two decades and the ruling mullahs have thrown all possible blocks in front of them to keep real reform from happening after their reinforcing their primacy. This is just another ploy the mullahs have to try and placate a population that wants to modernize after they got a taste of it in the early 2000s.
 
jmotivator said:
You still aren't getting it. This election was a sham. It wasn't a victory for reformists and moderates as the ruling theocracy didn't let any actual reformists and moderates into the election.

I am saying that the Iranian people have been voting moderate and reformist for over two decades and the ruling mullahs have thrown all possible blocks in front of them to keep real reform from happening after their reinforcing their primacy. This is just another ploy the mullahs have to try and placate a population that wants to modernize after they got a taste of it in the early 2000s.
Click to expand...

The Ayatollah is an old guy and will probably die soon. Once he does I expect there will be a lot of unrest and calls for change.
 
akrunner88 said:
The Ayatollah is an old guy and will probably die soon. Once he does I expect there will be a lot of unrest and calls for change.
Click to expand...

Ayatollahs are always old guys. The next Ayatollah will be no different than Khamenei, or Khomeini before him.
 
Threegoofs said:
So what you're saying is that the intense hardline Fundsmentalist Mullahs can be swayed by cash.

Looks like they aren't as hard line as you were implying a few posts ago. In fact, they sound downright American.
Click to expand...

I don't give a rats ass. Mullah's need money for proxy wars and nuclear playground.

Bin Laden used money pretty well didn't he?
 
A little Iran Trivia: Iran was the only country in the world we exported the F-14 to. :cool:

This is good news from Iran. The Islamophobes aren't quite sure what to say.
 
In Iran, to run you have to be approved by the ruling council. So as they say in Farsi: "New boss, Same as old boss"

We shall see. Remember the average age in Iran in ~ 26, they want girls, booze, and iPhones, too!
 
fmw said:
No, they could clear out the installation in a lot less than 21 days so nobody would find anything. That was the point.
Click to expand...

Well to be fair, breaking down a nuclear facility and moving it ahhh where, is a bit more involved than moving household goods. I wonder if our country could do so...

Now the support crew would be pretty massive and just how do you hide that from surveillance???

I dunno, we'd have to twist reality like the run-up to invade Iraq. The premise was we can't prove they didn't and could come up with all manner of possibilities, none of which were ever tested to see if they were practical.... :peace
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom