• 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!

McCain: Iran Election "Corrupt"


I don't think it would be prudent for Obama to say anything just yet. The situation is volatile and if he says anything, it might cause more upheaval and risks the lives of the protestors.....

Ahmadinejad would love for Obama to say something. He'd use it against the protesters and the US, blaming Obama for any resulting violence.
 
Wrong. At the very least, Obama needs to call Iran out for harming innocent protesters.
 
Wrong. At the very least, Obama needs to call Iran out for harming innocent protesters.

I agree that the Obama administration should say something strong about the murdering of protestors.

Yet what McCain sad was great and him being a Senator he an get away with it. A president no matter who is is needs to keep a cooler head.
 
Last edited:
Oh Obama replied finally..about half an hour ago.....no speech just a reply to a press question while talking with the Italian leader.

President Obama on Protests in Iran: "It Would Be Wrong for Me to Be Silent" - Political Punch

Wishy washy BS leaving the door open for him to appease Iran.


Obama stance is simple..its the same one he has on everything---
'How do I look and how do I keep my declared position in this..I don't care about anything else.'
He is throwing away the US leadership position in the world.

UK, France , and Germany have taken harder lines with Iran.......:doh
 
Last edited:
“We hope that the Ambassador will bring with him some explanations on the subject of events in Iran (and) respond to doubts being expressed on the regularity of the vote” said the French Foreign Ministry during a press conference published in part by Le Figaro.

“France, like its European partners, is expecting clear answers to doubts expressed about the vote” it said, adding that “Paris condemns the numerous arrests, notably of political personalities, that have taken place since Saturday. France equally condemns the brutal repression of peaceful demonstrations and the repeated attempts to muzzle the press, expression and communication.”
France leads the way in questioning Iran Election results - Digital Journal: Your News Network


Obama said nothing like that..
compared to France Obama was fawning over wordage that is clearly intended to excuse him when he goes appeasing Iran.
 
Last edited:
While I certainly think the elections were rigged, I do not see why McCain, as a public official, would assert publicly that the elections were corrupt and a fraud, without given any proof or reason to say so other than Iranian protests.

Did he call Bush's first term a fraud?
 
I thought the 80's was running protesters over with tanks. The 70;s was shooting protesters.
I stand corrected. That 70s show it is.
 
While I certainly think the elections were rigged, I do not see why McCain, as a public official, would assert publicly that the elections were corrupt and a fraud, without given any proof or reason to say so other than Iranian protests.

Several reasons:

1. It's good Republican politics. Strikes a stand for democracy and free elections while simultaneously puts Dear Leader on the spot.

2. It plays well to crowds here in the US. It's our congenital love of the underdog.

3. It wasn't just rigged...it was badly rigged. (Note to Ahamenijad: your opponent always wins his home district, and never win by more than about a 55-45 split; then the doubt breaks in your favor.).
 
Several reasons:

1. It's good Republican politics. Strikes a stand for democracy and free elections while simultaneously puts Dear Leader on the spot.

2. It plays well to crowds here in the US. It's our congenital love of the underdog.

3. It wasn't just rigged...it was badly rigged. (Note to Ahamenijad: your opponent always wins his home district, and never win by more than about a 55-45 split; then the doubt breaks in your favor.).

Not always true on the last point. Gore lost Tennessee and in the Primaries, Edwards lost in North Carolina. Though if the election win were closer, then you are right, many would not question. It was a horrible attempt.
 
Several reasons:

1. It's good Republican politics. Strikes a stand for democracy and free elections while simultaneously puts Dear Leader on the spot.

2. It plays well to crowds here in the US. It's our congenital love of the underdog.

3. It wasn't just rigged...it was badly rigged. (Note to Ahamenijad: your opponent always wins his home district, and never win by more than about a 55-45 split; then the doubt breaks in your favor.).

A 30% point "win" announced just after midnight in a country that does paper balloting which obviously are counted by hand since I do not belive that the Mullah Hullahs bought OCR equipment to electronically read the paper ballots is a dead give away.
 
Last edited:
Obama: Iranian voters' voices should be heard

President Barack Obama on Monday said Iranian voters have a right to feel that their ballots matter and urged the investigation into vote-rigging allegations to go forward without additional violence.

Obama said reports of violence that followed Iranian elections trouble him and all Americans. Peaceful dissent should never be subject to violence that followed weekend elections that gave President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a second term, he said.

"It would be wrong for me to be silent on what we've seen on the television the last few days," Obama told reporters at the White House.

Obama said he had no way of knowing whether the results are valid — the United States, he noted, had no election monitors in the country — but he added that it is important that the voters' choices be respected.

Hundreds of thousands marched in central Tehran. Gunfire from a pro-government militia killed one man and wounded several others while the government cracked down on dissent. An Associated Press photographer saw at least one demonstrator killed and several others with what appeared to be serious injuries.

The march came as Iran's most powerful figure, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, ordered an investigation into vote rigging against reform leader Mir Hossein Mousavi.

"I am deeply troubled by the violence I've been seeing on TV," Obama said.

Obama said he would continue to engage the Middle East nation, even if Ahmadinejad's re-election is upheld.

Obama said the United States must work with the country to prevent a nuclear arms race in the region. He emphasized that he disagrees with Ahmadenijad's "odious" beliefs and said the United States has serious disagreements with Iran's foreign policy.

Yet, he said, the United States has a broader interest in stopping Iran from developing nuclear weapons or exporting terrorism.

The president was careful not to wade too deeply into Iran's domestic politics, recognizing "sometimes, the United States can be a handy political football." He said it's up to Iran to determine its own leaders but that the country must respect voters' choice.

However, Obama praised protesters and the nation's youth who question results that showed Ahmadinejad winning a second term in a landslide.

"The world is watching and is inspired by their participation, regardless of what the ultimate outcome of the election was," he said.

Obama's remarks came at the end of an Oval Office meeting with Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi.
(article covers pretty much al his coments on it at the press conference..including -the USA bits.

Just diplomese baloney talk..
:cuckoo::surrender
 
Last edited:
(article covers pretty much al his coments on it at the press conference..including -the USA bits.

Just diplomese baloney talk..
:cuckoo::surrender



You're wrong. He said a few key things that needed to be said:

bama: Iranian voters' voices should be heard

President Barack Obama on Monday said Iranian voters have a right to feel that their ballots matter and urged the investigation into vote-rigging allegations to go forward without additional violence.

Obama said reports of violence that followed Iranian elections trouble him and all Americans. Peaceful dissent should never be subject to violence that followed weekend elections that gave President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a second term, he said.

"It would be wrong for me to be silent on what we've seen on the television the last few days," Obama told reporters at the White House.

Obama said he had no way of knowing whether the results are valid — the United States, he noted, had no election monitors in the country — but he added that it is important that the voters' choices be respected.

Hundreds of thousands marched in central Tehran. Gunfire from a pro-government militia killed one man and wounded several others while the government cracked down on dissent. An Associated Press photographer saw at least one demonstrator killed and several others with what appeared to be serious injuries.

The march came as Iran's most powerful figure, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, ordered an investigation into vote rigging against reform leader Mir Hossein Mousavi.

"I am deeply troubled by the violence I've been seeing on TV," Obama said.

Obama said he would continue to engage the Middle East nation, even if Ahmadinejad's re-election is upheld.

Obama said the United States must work with the country to prevent a nuclear arms race in the region. He emphasized that he disagrees with Ahmadenijad's "odious" beliefs and said the United States has serious disagreements with Iran's foreign policy.

Yet, he said, the United States has a broader interest in stopping Iran from developing nuclear weapons or exporting terrorism.

The president was careful not to wade too deeply into Iran's domestic politics, recognizing "sometimes, the United States can be a handy political football." He said it's up to Iran to determine its own leaders but that the country must respect voters' choice.

However, Obama praised protesters and the nation's youth who question results that showed Ahmadinejad winning a second term in a landslide.

"The world is watching and is inspired by their participation, regardless of what the ultimate outcome of the election was," he said.

Obama's remarks came at the end of an Oval Office meeting with Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi.

That was exactly what needed to be said, and what I EXPECTED would be said.

There were 3 things he needed to get across:

1. We're watching...2. Iranians should decide (not the mullahs)...and 3. peaceful dissent should not be subjected to violence.

Beyond that, there is nothing that can be said at this point in time. And, the U.S. could also make things worse by appearing to tamper with their election.
 
Just diplomese baloney talk..
:cuckoo::surrender

Just calling a spade a spade, "Triad," if he blew bubbles made of gold, and used them to pay down our national deficit, you'd find something to take shots at. Partisan hackery is not attractive, from either side.
 
Oh Obama replied finally..about half an hour ago.....no speech just a reply to a press question while talking with the Italian leader.

President Obama on Protests in Iran: "It Would Be Wrong for Me to Be Silent" - Political Punch

Wishy washy BS leaving the door open for him to appease Iran.


Obama stance is simple..its the same one he has on everything---
'How do I look and how do I keep my declared position in this..I don't care about anything else.'
He is throwing away the US leadership position in the world.

UK, France , and Germany have taken harder lines with Iran.......:doh

If Obama says that the elections are a fraud, Khamenei and Ahmadinejad have a pretext by which they can crack down on the protesters, which are suddenly an American conspiracy to overthrow the government.

Furthermore, it would not be prudent for Obama to say anything just yet. After Iran's power struggle sorts itself out, the United States is still going to need to talk to whomever is on the other side of the table. If it's Mousavi-Rafsanjani-Khatami, great. Obama can always call the old regime illegitimate when it becomes more apparent that the reformers are going to prevail, and no one would ever accuse him of not being on their side. If it's Ahmadinejad-Khamenei, that sucks, but the United States is still going to need to talk to them. It will be a lot more difficult to do so if A) they think Obama is trying to engineer their downfall, and B) Obama has publicly called their regime illegitimate.

Of course, none of these points matter if you don't WANT the United States to pursue negotiations, and prefer to sabotage negotiations by any means necessary. But for those of us in the reality-based community, it would be imprudent for Obama to take sides yet.
 
Last edited:
One year....March 2010

That is his deadline.

He will "never notice" it and he won't back it up when the day comes.


One year..I expect action or I expect Obama is a joke from each and every one of you.

/////////////////

the reality-based community,
The one that ignores a decade of EU negotiations?
The one that ignores Russian and even Chinese efforts?
The one that ignores Arab State efforts?
The one that ignore Irans declaratiosn of intent?
The one in 2003 was saying Iran was the REAL ENEMY but in 2006-7 whern Iran told the EU to go to hell decided Iran was a Democracy beign badmouthed by the USA and Jews?




Reality is they have called your bluffs and here many of you are trying to sell the same sorry ass bluffs while excusing the weakest president in foreign affair since Carter.
Oh but then that real reality not Obamaland reality.


///////////////

US should at minimal vocally support the efforts of anyone to overthrow the regime of Iran. Not to mention the That Obama barely mentioned democracy past "we dunno what to make of it" in favor of a photo-op someday while not AT LEAST vocally backing up any possible plan someone might have for a coup by saying the USA will stand behind those who seek Freedom and Democracy in Iran.
He failed..

The Europeans stood up..the USA whined.



Message to those in Iran who are even thinking of pushing this to a revolution is clear. Whether some of you wish to admit it or not....

"THE USA IS NOT WITH YOU"


Horrible message to send around the world.
But that is Obama may he drown in it.
 
Last edited:
The one that ignores a decade of EU negotiations?
The one that ignores Russian and even Chinese efforts?
The one that ignores Arab State efforts?
The one that ignore Irans declaratiosn of intent?
The one in 2003 was saying Iran was the REAL ENEMY but in 2006-7 whern Iran told the EU to go to hell decided Iran was a Democracy beign badmouthed by the USA and Jews?

This is what I'm talking about. You don't WANT negotiations to succeed. So forgive me if I don't trust your motives when you call for Obama to condemn the Iranian government at this time.

Triad said:
Reality is they have called your bluffs and here many of you are trying to sell the same sorry ass bluffs while excusing the weakest president in foreign affair since Carter.
Oh but then that real reality not Obamaland reality.


///////////////

US should at minimal vocally support the efforts of anyone to overthrow the regime of Iran. Not to mention the That Obama barely mentioned democracy past "we dunno what to make of it" in favor of a photo-op someday while not AT LEAST vocally backing up any possible plan someone might have for a coup by saying the USA will stand behind those who seek Freedom and Democracy in Iran.
He failed..

The Europeans stood up..the USA whined.

Again, you don't WANT negotiations to succeed. So you call for US backing of a coup, which would jettison any hopes of negotiations if it failed.

Triad said:
Message to those in Iran who are even thinking of pushing this to a revolution is clear. Whether some of you wish to admit it or not....

"THE USA IS NOT WITH YOU"

The Iranian people know perfectly well that the United States and their government are at odds with one another, and have been for 30 years. Do you take them for complete idiots? Furthermore, what makes you think that American involvement in Iran's election would be desirable or beneficial to either country?

Let the process sort itself out. Chances are, the establishment will restore order...and our government would be in a more difficult position if it calls their regime illegitimate and then had to negotiate with them. And if by some good fortune, Iran has itself a Green Revolution, that's even better. We'll have negotiating partners who are interested in good relations with the rest of the world and in reforming their own system of government.
 
Last edited:
Ok when is the deadline on this for you.

I want some realistic deadline not oh when the sky is colored blue and bam flies by your window on fairy wings.

Iran has until date x to stop or else.
When is that...?

Negotiations already failed. You like many others who argue the same way you are ignore that.
SO DUH I don't want more talks, more fake promises, more empty words, more high minded nonsense the time for talking is over.

If they need any help they can probably get it form North Korea...but they likely don't.

///////

Every damn year Iran says UP YOURS, DEATH TO THE JEWS ,DEATH TO AMERICA, supplies terrorist etc..... and continue processing nuclear material while obviously to any idiot trying to make a weapon.


EVERY YEAR..whens it stop?

IMO Obama and probably you will do this every year until Iran gets a nuclear weapon and then turn right around and say well we can't do anything about it now.
IOW its stops when Iran gets what it wants.
 
You're wrong. He said a few key things that needed to be said:



That was exactly what needed to be said, and what I EXPECTED would be said.

There were 3 things he needed to get across:

1. We're watching...2. Iranians should decide (not the mullahs)...and 3. peaceful dissent should not be subjected to violence.

Beyond that, there is nothing that can be said at this point in time. And, the U.S. could also make things worse by appearing to tamper with their election.



We're doing nothing and Proud of it?

Weee look at me say nothing and later then eveyrone else too!
--that kinda fits with his narcissistic appeaser mentality now don't it..catz :smoking:


When Hillary resigns to start her 2012 bid remember this it will be part of her 3am: 'I told You So' campaign.I think she'll have plenty of opposition ;)
/////////////

He should have enhanced his wordage on our a support for democracy..dropped the USA is a football BS and agree with the EU that the repression is reprehensible and wrong. While vocally stating that the USA would 'prefer to not have the theocracy in power' but that is the way it is for now.
He did none of that...
He came closest to the last bit but he did it in a hat in hand come hither and talk with us manner.

USA delayed kinda ho hum BS responded to this. The French responded better.
Why?

The French as part of the EU(US agreed to let Europe negotiate remember the left was all OMG Bush has to let the Europeans talks to them!..and he did-memories)had their negotiations and got told to piss off..
Obama is not backing them up.
 
Last edited:
I find myself in the odd position of finding the BBC generally is saying the same thing I am...just nicer:)

Obama's cautious reaction to Iran

By Jonathan Beale
BBC News, Washington

It took President Obama until Monday evening to respond publicly to the outcome of the Iranian election.

Fair enough, given the initial confusion and the sensitivity of the issue.

When he did break his silence, his words suggested he was walking a fine diplomatic line.

....

But is it a triumph of pragmatism over principle?

The charge levelled against President Bush was that he was too simplistic, that there was no nuance in his foreign policy, that he only saw the world in black and white.

But if he were in charge now, we would at least know his verdict on these elections
BBC NEWS | Americas | Obama's cautious reaction to Iran

More and more the media isn't just shuffling his routines under the covers and saying all's well.


Coupled with this-

U.S. Urges Iran to Accept Invite to Nuclear Talks

Monday, June 15, 2009


UNITED NATIONS — The United States urged Iran on Monday to agree to a meeting with the six key nations trying to ensure that its nuclear program is peaceful in which the U.S. will be "a full participant."

U.S. deputy ambassador Rosemary DiCarlo told the U.N. Security Council that Iran has not responded to the request from the five permanent council members — the U.S., Russia, China, Britain and France — and Germany for new talks, which would be the first international discussion on Iran's nuclear program since President Barack Obama took office in January.

"The United States remains committed to direct diplomacy with Iran to resolve issues of concern to the international community and will engage on the basis of mutual respect," DiCarlo said. "The United States will be a full participant in these discussions and we continue to urge Iran to accept this invitation."
U.S. Urges Iran to Accept Invite to Nuclear Talks - International News | News of the World | Middle East News | Europe News - FOXNews.com

The protesters are nuisances to Obama's plans and he's telling not only Iran that but the protesters as well.
 
Last edited:
We're doing nothing and Proud of it?

Weee look at me say nothing and later then eveyrone else too!
--that kinda fits with his narcissistic appeaser mentality now don't it..catz :smoking:

What part of "this isn't about us" do you not get? Talk about narcissistic.

If and when the leaders of the protest call for American support, then that is the time for us to take a stronger stance. BUT, at this point in time, by throwing our weight too strongly behind a particular candidate, we could actually cause harm to the people risking their lives for freedom in Iran, and undermine their cause.

This isn't a "hammer" issue. If a hammer is all you have, then you think everything looks like a nail. This is a delicate electronic instrument.

You can't beat on it with a hammer and sound the drums of war, and think it's going to help.

The Washington Independent This Is Not About Making the U.S. Feel Good About Itself


What’s missing here is an effort at determining what the Iranian dissenters want from the Obama administration. The fact that it’s not clear what the answer to that question is itself serves as a powerful indicator that the protest movement is first and foremost concerned about handling this on its own. As best I can tell from NIAC and from Twitter and from talking with Iranian human rights advocates in the United States, the dissenters want the Obama administration to refuse to recognize Ahmadinejad’s claims of victory; to express concern for the safety of the protesters; and then to get out of the way. The Obama administration can be fairly criticized for not saying enough on the second point, though if, as Michael Scherer believes, Obama’s going to say something at 5 p.m., maybe that will change. But it doesn’t follow from Obama’s muted discussion of the dissenters that he’s indifferent to their plight. From talking to administration officials, I am convinced that they are very concerned that American rhetorical support will immediately become a cudgel in the hands of Ahmadinejad. Would that outcome advance human rights?

It’s emotionally unsatisfying not to proclaim unequivocal support for the protesters. But the truer measure of support, as Trita Parsi told me, is to follow their lead. Moussavi, for instance, has not issued any statement about what he wants the international community to do. If the protesters begin calling for a more direct American response, then that really will have to compel the administration to reconsider its position. But until then, with so many lives at stake, the administration can’t afford to take a stance just because it makes Americans feel just and righteous.
 
The protesters are nuisances to Obama's plans and he's telling not only Iran that but the protesters as well.

No. Instead of charging ahead, by the seat of his pants, he is waiting for the people of Iran to clearly express what they want from the outside world. What they've said, so far, that they want is this:

Don't stop watching. Don't forget about our struggle. Make sure the world sees it.

That's all that they've asked for at this point in time.

You're about as subtle as a hand grenade.
 
Back
Top Bottom