• 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!

Riots erupt in Tehran over 'stolen' election

Under Pressure, Obama Calls on Iran to End Violence, 'Unjust' Actions.

President Obama on Saturday called on the Iranian government to "stop all violent and unjust actions against its own people" amid calls for the White House to go further in showing support for the Iranian people after the country's disputed elections.

Republicans, in particular, have pressed Obama to speak out more forcefully, as protesters and authorities clashed Saturday in Tehran during a government crackdown.

"The universal rights to assembly and free speech must be respected and the United States stands with all who seek to exercise those rights," Obama said in a written statement.

Obama also referred back to his speech this month to the Muslim world, saying "suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. The Iranian people will ultimately judge the actions of their own government. If the Iranian government seeks the respect of the international community, it must respect the dignity of its own people and govern through consent, not coercion."

And Obama cited the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.'s, famous quote: "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice."

"I believe that," Obama said. "The international community believes that. And right now, we are bearing witness to the Iranian peoples' belief in that truth, and we will continue to bear witness."
Click to expand...

Let's keep up the pressure. Given that the regime's thugs have started using axes and daggers against the protesters prior to this statement by Obama, I think my position that his words wouldn't usher in a crackdown has been vindicated.
 
Last edited:
Under Pressure, Obama Calls on Iran to End Violence, 'Unjust' Actions - Political News - FOXNews.com

President Obama on Saturday called on the Iranian government to "stop all violent and unjust actions against its own people" amid calls for the White House to go further in showing support for the Iranian people after the country's disputed elections.
Click to expand...
Why could he not have said this sooner?

"The universal rights to assembly and free speech must be respected and the United States stands with all who seek to exercise those rights," Obama said in a written statement.
Click to expand...
Why did he not say this sooner?

Dear Leader is playing catch-up.

There's No False Choice on Iran
The next day, with hordes of demonstrators in the streets of Tehran and other Iranian cities, Obama insisted, "it's not productive, given the history of U.S.-Iranian relations, to be seen as meddling, the U.S. president meddling in Iranian elections." Besides, he said Khamenei "indicates he understands the Iranian people have deep concerns about the election." Less than three days later, he declared the election results legitimate.
Click to expand...
Had Dear Leader spoken forcefully about the rights of assembly and free speech last weekend, might Khameni rethought his calculus vis-a-vis Ahamenijad?

When Navy sharpshooters, with Obama's permission, shot Somali pirates and rescued an American ship captain, the president got well-deserved credit for smooth handling of a minor emergency. He was active and energetic when the stakes were small.

In Iran, the stakes are large, though you wouldn't know it from Obama's passive and ineffective response. He acts as if his choice of what to do in Iran is too difficult, too fraught with danger, for him to decide. It's not. A stronger president would see the choice as false.
Click to expand...
Dear Leader should have, from the very first, reminded the world that, in the US, at least,

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Click to expand...
The American position on Iran has already been stated--on July 4, 1776.
 
celticlord said:
Why could he not have said this sooner?

Why did he not say this sooner?

Dear Leader is playing catch-up.
Click to expand...
I agree, he is playing catch up and while I'm glad he's saying something now, I'm very disappointed that the didn't do this days ago. But I'll take what I can get at this point.


Had Dear Leader spoken forcefully about the rights of assembly and free speech last weekend, might Khameni rethought his calculus vis-a-vis Ahamenijad?
Click to expand...
No, I don't think it would have made any difference in how Khameni backed his dog.

Dear Leader should have, from the very first, reminded the world that, in the US, at least,
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Click to expand...
The American position on Iran has already been stated--on July 4, 1776.
Click to expand...
You'll find no argument with me on this at all.
 
youknowwho said:
we had even some 120%+ turnouts. mostly with 110%+ voting for ahmadinejad!!
Click to expand...

And the protests and murders go into Saturday and still the U.S. sits here idle unwilling to back this freedom movement. One wonders what would have happened had the French been so cavalier in supporting our own revolution.
 
Last edited:
Agent Ferris said:
And the protests and murders go into Saturday and still the U.S. sits here idle unwilling to back this freedom movement. One wonders what would have happened had the French been so cavalier in supporting our own revolution.
Click to expand...

Ours was much further along before the french decided to assist us.
 
Agent Ferris said:
And the protests and murders go into Saturday and still the U.S. sits here idle unwilling to back this freedom movement. One wonders what would have happened had the French been so cavalier in supporting our own revolution.
Click to expand...
Err....the French were that cavalier.

They didn't agree to back the American Revolution until after Saratoga. They wanted to see if the uprising had stamina.

It is a prudent course to take. No nation should intrude on what is and must remain a matter of Iranian domestic politics. As we would demand respect for our sovereignty, we must show respect for Iranian sovereignty, even though we may desire to deal with the dictatorship of a Mousavi rather than the dictatorship of an Ahamenijad.

We can and should affirm our own political principles in this--the primacy of free and fair elections, the right of free assembly and the right of free speech, the requirement that people enjoy the capacity to petition the government for redress of grievances. Such is our heritage, and such within our heritage can serve as a guide, a beacon, and even an inspiration to the protesters in Iran. For this reason alone we should, in this time more so than any other time, declare our principles loudly, clearly, and often.
 
Last edited:
celticlord said:
Err....the French were that cavalier.

They didn't agree to back the American Revolution until after Saratoga. They wanted to see if the uprising had stamina.

It is a prudent course to take. No nation should intrude on what is and must remain a matter of Iranian domestic politics. As we would demand respect for our sovereignty, we must show respect for Iranian sovereignty, even though we may desire to deal with the dictatorship of a Mousavi rather than the dictatorship of an Ahamenijad.

We can and should affirm our own political principles in this--the primacy of free and fair elections, the right of free assembly and the right of free speech, the requirement that people enjoy the capacity to petition the government for redress of grievances. Such is our heritage, and such within our heritage can serve as a guide, a beacon, and even an inspiration to the protesters in Iran. For this reason alone we should, in this time more so than any other time, declare our principles loudly, clearly, and often.
Click to expand...

The Iranian people have been denied these rights for the last 3+ decades, can't you see that the Iranian people are crying out for help? The polite meaningless words of our leadership are not helping the protesters getting boiling water pored on their heads, tear gassed and shot.
 
Agent Ferris said:
The Iranian people have been denied these rights for the last 3+ decades, can't you see that the Iranian people are crying out for help? The polite meaningless words of our leadership are not helping the protesters getting boiling water pored on their heads, tear gassed and shot.
Click to expand...
No joke.

Such words didn't help much when Washington was getting his ass handed to him in 1776, losing New York and most of New Jersey.

When Burgoyne lost his army to Gates at Saratoga in October, 1777, that's when the French decided backing the Americans was the winning play.

When the protesters show they can beat back the mullahs, then it's time for the US to back the protesters explicitly. Until they can do that, the US should stay on the sidelines with the rest of the world.
 
celticlord said:
No joke.

Such words didn't help much when Washington was getting his ass handed to him in 1776, losing New York and most of New Jersey.

When Burgoyne lost his army to Gates at Saratoga in October, 1777, that's when the French decided backing the Americans was the winning play.
Click to expand...

So we should wait a year before we decide to help?

When the protesters show they can beat back the mullahs, then it's time for the US to back the protesters explicitly. Until they can do that, the US should stay on the sidelines with the rest of the world.
Click to expand...

How are they going to do that against fighters, strike helicopters, and tanks with rocks and molotov cocktails?
 
Agent Ferris said:
So we should wait a year before we decide to help?
Click to expand...
We should wait until they show they have a potentially winning hand. If that's tomorrow, great. If that's the day after next year, so be it. If it's after the second coming of Mohammed, that's when it will be.

Agent Ferris said:
How are they going to do that against fighters, strike helicopters, and tanks with rocks and molotov cocktails?
Click to expand...
Fighters, strike helicopters, and tanks are pretty useless in an urban environment, especially when the challenge is a domestic one (the general idea of putting down a riot is to demolish the rioters without demolishing the buildings). Riot suppression requires the government putting bodies with guns up against bodies with rocks and molotov cocktails.

Which is when you learn the sucky thing about body armor: kevlar stops rounds but doesn't do a damn thing against rocks and molotov cocktails.
 
Fighters, strike helicopters, and tanks are pretty useless in an urban environment, especially when the challenge is a domestic one (the general idea of putting down a riot is to demolish the rioters without demolishing the buildings). Riot suppression requires the government putting bodies with guns up against bodies with rocks and molotov cocktails.
Click to expand...

Provided the mullah's idea of riot suppression is the same as ours. Let's see...shooting rioters with AK-47's from the rooftops, hacking them with axes, and stabbing them with daggers. I did a substantial amount of riot control training in the military police...never saw those as options. The regime in Tehran has already signaled they will not constrain themselves to western philosophies regarding how to handle rioters. These crowds are reaching sizes that traditional riot control would be very ineffective in dealing with. There is no way possible to control a crowd of 100,000 or more angry citizens armed with melee weapons and firebombs. The only thing you can do is to let them do their thing and wait for them to get tired or go in and start killing them where they stand. Many of these crowds are larger than can be possibly contained by any form or traditional riot control and more than likely have some degree of organization.

Tanks and helicopters could be not only effective but completely devastating in urban environments. We have proven that already in Iraq. When allowed to fire indiscriminately into large crowds in the streets the body count would be sickening. If the regime plans on crushing these crowds they will need more than tear gas and water cannons.
 
So far I haven't heard anything about troops. Military is the big player nobody is thinking much about atm but it will decide where Iran goes if the protests go to revolution.


Mousavi or whatever has seemingly accepted he's a major player but even he has no control now.
So now supposedly he has said to continue even if he is arrested or killed.

Supposedly these protests are not all central to Tehran(in two other major urban areas maybe) but the extent of it outside is unknown.

Supreme leader says its over AhmanutO is my man.

SO the protestors need to decide what are they protesting ...seems today they put in an effort against the Supreme Leader..BUT lets be honest they need to make clear they want to remove the regime and do it..or frankly go home and hope they can ride out the following years of arrests/etc.

prince.jpg
 
Iran TV reports 10 killed in Saturday protests
Staff and agencies
Sunday 21 June 2009

Ten people were killed and more than 100 injured in Tehran during yesterday's protests, state-run television said today, as Iran was braced for the possibility of further post-election confrontations.

State television said the deaths happened during clashes between police and "terrorist groups". Reuters reported that two gas stations were set on fire, citing Iran's English-language Press TV, which described the culprits as "rioters". Thousands of protesters clashed with black-clad police wielding guns, truncheons, tear gas and water cannons. Amateur video showed the demonstrators pelting police with stones and shouting: "Death to the dictator!"

Yesterday's clashes along one of Tehran's main avenues – as described by witnesses – had far fewer demonstrators than recent mass rallies for Mousavi. But they marked another blow to authorities who sought to intimidate protesters with harsh warnings and lines of black-clad police three deep in places. The rallies left questions about Mousavi's ability to hold together his protest movement. He bewildered many followers by not directly replying to the ultimatum issued Friday by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's most powerful figure, to call off the demonstrations or risk being held responsible for "bloodshed, violence and rioting".

Amateur video showed clashes erupting in the southern city of Shiraz yesterday and witnesses reported street violence in Isfahan, south of Tehran.
Click to expand...
Source: guardian.co.uk

This is make-it or break-it time. The protests seem to be losing density and momentum.
 
This is make-it or break-it time. The protests seem to be losing density and momentum.
Click to expand...

The protests are losing density and momentum because the street fighting is gaining density and momentum. Expect things to escalate in the next few days, perhaps to armed conflict.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
The protests are losing density and momentum because the street fighting is gaining density and momentum. Expect things to escalate in the next few days, perhaps to armed conflict.
Click to expand...

do Iranian citizens have weapons?, or have the right to bear arms?
If the military decides to side with the citizens, there is a chance of success. I don't expect to see the religious leaders giving up their power easily....
 
I agree, Tashah.

If the protests are to evolve into a full-fledged revolution, the people will need to sustain their demonstrations/protests in the days and weeks ahead. Those protests will need to spread and grow larger over time. A major commercial boycott e.g., workers in key sectors such as Iran's oil production facilities would need to walk off the job in an economic boycott as happened toward the end of the Shah's rule, to begin to bring the kind of pressure that would topple the existing regime.

At this time, I still don't believe a revolution is the most likely outcome.
 
Last edited:
Khayembii Communique said:
The protests are losing density and momentum because the street fighting is gaining density and momentum. Expect things to escalate in the next few days, perhaps to armed conflict.
Click to expand...

Riot police out in force in calm Tehran - CNN.com

As thousands of riot police and militia lined Tehran's streets Sunday, calm prevailed in the city even as the public rift among Iranian leaders appeared to be widening.
Click to expand...
Is this calm in the middle of a storm, or the storm dying out?
 
do Iranian citizens have weapons?, or have the right to bear arms?
Click to expand...

There have been reports of demonstrators going "Basiji hunting" at night. Also, there have been a few reports of demonstrators shooting back at Basiji, however this is not on a wide scale. We have reports, though, that confirm what I have said in my previous post.

If the military decides to side with the citizens, there is a chance of success.
Click to expand...

Much in the same way as the police and Revolutionary Guard, there have been reports of members of the military refusing to suppress the demonstrators.

Is this calm in the middle of a storm, or the storm dying out?
Click to expand...

This is the calm before the storm. After yesterday's events people are regrouping and preparing for the next phase of struggle. Things are going to seriously pick up in the next couple of days.
 
just got this twitter alert

Courage on Tehran's Streets; A Photographer Is Missing

A NOTE TO OUR READERS: We are saddened to report that the Iranian photojournalist, whose pictures appear in this gallery, is missing. He has not been in contact with us; this morning we received the following email from one of his relatives. We will update this space when we have more details. THE EMAIL: Hi im [photographer’s relative], when he go out side yester day for he never came back home and also his friend and a lot of our young brave people, government arrested them [. . .] don’t let them suffer in those bloody hands. With thanks. Pictured: A young woman amid the tear gas.
Click to expand...

Eyewitness: From Tehran's Streets - Photo Gallery, 24 Pictures - LIFE
 
Last edited:
do Iranian citizens have weapons?, or have the right to bear arms?
Click to expand...

no. we're not allowed to bear arms. although, it can be supplied from iraq or pakistan borders.
 
I know that our armchair generals are quite upset that the US is not meddling in the affairs of other countries half way across the globe. But look on the bright side guys. Beer is still cheap and you have fresh batteries in your TV remote. :cool:

I, for one, am glad to see the Iranians standing up to their lopsided dumbass of a government. :roll: They will learn, as our forefathers here in America did, freedom ain't free. And just like the Iranian's didn't spill their blood to establish and preserve our American freedom's for us, I feel inclined to do the same for them.

However, I realize too that the very people I am "rooting" for, in spirit in their struggle against their theocratic dictatorship, are the same people who would like nothing more than to give each and American an acid bath. Let's not pretend we're all friends here. I'm still pissed about the hostage taking 30 years ago.

So, that being said, from my point of view, I could care less if the whole nation of Iran implodes upon itself and let the last man standing turn off the lights.

If any country goes into Iran and interferes, it should be Russia or China. They have more to lose with Iran's squalor than we do. Why is it always our job to bitch-slap these tyrants?

Iran has to make their own bed and sleep in it.

Screw Iran.





Just keepin' it simple. :cool:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom