View Full Version : Iranian Presidential Election
Can anyone explain how I read the situation so wrong in Iran? First, the opposition guy, Mousavi (sp), was reported to have got such a high lead that there were doubts that there would be a need for a second round of voting.
Then the following day I heard that Ahmadinajad had got a insurmountable lead in the vote.
How can such wide predictions be turned around? It was not as if the vote was reported to be a narrow victory on both times I listened into the news.
Did I just mishear it?:confused
And now there are accusations of vote-rigging by Mousavi.
Hmmm....hold on while I check.....nope, I still don't care. :Razz
Alice in Blunderland
14-Jun-09, 19:40
Explanation coming up :
C<O<R<R<U<P<T<I<O<N .......
hope this helps.;)
Explanation coming up :
C<O<R<R<U<P<T<I<O<N .......
hope this helps.;)
Sorry Alice the explanation is P-O-L-I-T-I-C-I-A-N-S, but you could be right [lol]
It was a teeny bit silly of Ahmadinajad to announce the percentage by which he had won before the votes were counted.
If it can happen in the US to get Bush elected why can't it happen in Iran? Power is what is it is all about.
C-o-r-r-u-p-t P-o-l-i-t-i-t-i-a-n-s. :D
Golach and Alice you may both be right. ;)
Been watching PressTV (Iranian News channel on 515 Sky), which really bears no relation to what we - in the West - are seeing and hearing. BUT just a few minutes ago on BBC24 Hazir Teimouran a well established commentator on Iran said ominously "This is the beginning of the end"
I wonder?
fingalmacool
16-Jun-09, 01:02
The Yanks must be laughing their socks off, or maybe they helped to cause the confusion. The next move on their war checkers board was to teach the Iranians a lesson, move in with all guns blazing and give them a good kicking or so we were led to believe, "if they weren't so busy elsewhere" so with my over active conspiracy mind, is this mana from heaven, that the Iranians are fighting amongst themselves and it looks like it will get only worse, so ?
Maybe its a blessing in disguise as I think that Iran will be too big a nut to crack, and the school bully might of got a bigger nose bleed than he is getting already:confused
oldmarine
16-Jun-09, 01:04
Can anyone explain how I read the situation so wrong in Iran? First, the opposition guy, Mousavi (sp), was reported to have got such a high lead that there were doubts that there would be a need for a second round of voting.
Then the following day I heard that Ahmadinajad had got a insurmountable lead in the vote.
How can such wide predictions be turned around? It was not as if the vote was reported to be a narrow victory on both times I listened into the news.
Did I just mishear it?:confused
And now there are accusations of vote-rigging by Mousavi.
Looks fixed to me. From what I've seen in the past it looks like trouble will plague every one again in the future. I feel sorry for those people in Iran who would like to live with the rest of the world.
oldmarine
16-Jun-09, 06:11
The Yanks must be laughing their socks off, or maybe they helped to cause the confusion. The next move on their war checkers board was to teach the Iranians a lesson, move in with all guns blazing and give them a good kicking or so we were led to believe, "if they weren't so busy elsewhere" so with my over active conspiracy mind, is this mana from heaven, that the Iranians are fighting amongst themselves and it looks like it will get only worse, so ?
Maybe its a blessing in disguise as I think that Iran will be too big a nut to crack, and the school bully might of got a bigger nose bleed than he is getting already:confused
fingalmacool: Why do you think the Yanks are laughing about this matter? The citizens in the states don't want war with anyone. In fact, they have been trying to get the USA government to move troops out of Iraq & Afghanistan. In fact the citizens did not want to go to war during WW2 before they were attacked by the Japanese Empire. I remember when Churchill was happy with that event because eventually the USA did declare war against the axis powers and sent 80% of their supplies to fight the war in Europe while we in the Pacific got only 20% to fight a war that we almost lost. I guess that would have made you happy. You sound somewhat like a former Islamic Muslim who used to post on here who always criticised the USA for their efforts.
fingalmacool
16-Jun-09, 13:54
fingalmacool: Why do you think the Yanks are laughing about this matter? The citizens in the states don't want war with anyone. In fact, they have been trying to get the USA government to move troops out of Iraq & Afghanistan. In fact the citizens did not want to go to war during WW2 before they were attacked by the Japanese Empire. I remember when Churchill was happy with that event because eventually the USA did declare war against the axis powers and sent 80% of their supplies to fight the war in Europe while we in the Pacific got only 20% to fight a war that we almost lost. I guess that would have made you happy. You sound somewhat like a former Islamic Muslim who used to post on here who always criticised the USA for their efforts.
OOPs sorry didn't know that the US citizens controlled the government when it came to war, as history shows NOT, not sure what a Islamic muslim is supposed to sound like, but i will endeavour to find out, "maybe u-tube will give me the info i need":confused
davlaurjen
16-Jun-09, 23:26
Russia welcomed Amadinejad(sp) with open arms today.With an ally like Russia,the President of Iran probably feels pretty secure.
Russia welcomed Amadinejad(sp) with open arms today.With an ally like Russia,the President of Iran probably feels pretty secure.
Naha... he's just the Prime Minister. I'm betting he's trying to build alliances quickly before his world falls apart.
Russia welcomed Amadinejad(sp) with open arms today.With an ally like Russia,the President of Iran probably feels pretty secure.
Typically Russian....any enemy of my enemy is my friend. [disgust]
As I understand it Ahmadinajad has little or no real power. The real power resides with the Mullahs who are a lot craftier and more sophisticated than the characters in the Iran parliament.
What we should be worried about is a Tenamen square situation.
oldmarine
18-Jun-09, 04:10
OOPs sorry didn't know that the US citizens controlled the government when it came to war, as history shows NOT, not sure what a Islamic muslim is supposed to sound like, but i will endeavour to find out, "maybe u-tube will give me the info i need":confused
fingalmacool: President Obama has declared hands-off with Iran. He has been trying to reach a peaceful settlement with the Iranean government. Where do you get your facts? The USA has been solid friends with Scotland, England and Great Britain for a long time. I served during WW2 with many citizens of Great Britain including many Scots. The USA government and citizens have supported you and fought your enemies through two world wars and by last observation are still doing the same. Where do you get your information that you say otherwise. I know of many of your fellow citizens, some on this web site, who have settled in the USA.
Oh Dear.
This will put the cat amongst the pigeons me thinks?:
Ayatollah denies election fraud
Iran's Supreme Leader has insisted there was no fraud in the recent disputed presidential elections.
In his first public remarks since unrest sparked by the results, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei voiced support for President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
The ayatollah said Mr Ahmadinejad's views on foreign affairs and social issues were closer to his than those of the other candidates.
Demonstrators calling for a new election vowed to stage fresh protests. The Guardian Council - Iran's main electoral authority - has invited Mr Ahmadinejad's main election rival Mir Hossein Mousavi and two other defeated candidates to discuss their objections then.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8108661.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8108661.stm)
oldmarine
19-Jun-09, 22:24
Oh Dear.
This will put the cat amongst the pigeons me thinks?:
Ayatollah denies election fraud
Iran's Supreme Leader has insisted there was no fraud in the recent disputed presidential elections.
In his first public remarks since unrest sparked by the results, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei voiced support for President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
The ayatollah said Mr Ahmadinejad's views on foreign affairs and social issues were closer to his than those of the other candidates.
Demonstrators calling for a new election vowed to stage fresh protests. The Guardian Council - Iran's main electoral authority - has invited Mr Ahmadinejad's main election rival Mir Hossein Mousavi and two other defeated candidates to discuss their objections then.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8108661.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8108661.stm)
Looks like a done deal in Iran. Certainly a good thing that sensible leaders did not get involved in this mess. The president of Iran, as well as Khomeni is already blaming the Western world of getting involved in these politics. This has not happened, but they want to stir the pot hoping their people will believe this as truth.
Are we really the most evil of all foreign powers?:confused
What have we done to earn such a status? It disturbs me that my country is thought of in this way.
oldmarine
21-Jun-09, 07:06
Are we really the most evil of all foreign powers?:confused
What have we done to earn such a status? It disturbs me that my country is thought of in this way.
I would like to agree with you Rheghead. However, It looks like the leaders here in the USA are getting involved with Iran's problems. Demonstrators appear to be forcing President Obama and his Democrat party to make statements that could cause more problems. So far, UK leaders appear to be keeping hands-off and that ultimately could be a good thing. There are no easy answers to these problems.
Are we really the most evil of all foreign powers?:confused
What have we done to earn such a status? It disturbs me that my country is thought of in this way.
We illegally invaded another country under false pretences and even when it was exposed for the lie it was we tried to change our story. The major powers in the word should be well above actions like that.
We illegally invaded another country under false pretences and even when it was exposed for the lie it was we tried to change our story. The major powers in the word should be well above actions like that.
Under what law was it illegal?:confused
I thought they welcomed our tanks with open arms.
oldmarine
21-Jun-09, 16:55
Under what law was it illegal?:confused
I thought they welcomed our tanks with open arms.
It's all in the eye of the beholder.
Under what law was it illegal?:confused
I thought they welcomed our tanks with open arms.
Under the UN and International Law. I know many countries don't take it seriously but it is still there and we did sign up to it.
Under the UN and International Law. I know many countries don't take it seriously but it is still there and we did sign up to it.
Which part? I mean which sub-section, chapter etc?:confused
It's alright just saying it is until you see if it fits the definition.
I would imagine Kofi Annan was referencing this section when he made the announcment http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter7.shtml
This also seems to be a good article with links to official government sites etc.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6917.htm
I would imagine Kofi Annan was referencing this section when he made the announcment http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter7.shtml
This also seems to be a good article with links to official government sites etc.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6917.htm
But which bit says the Iraq war was 'illegal'?:confused
It is not going to say that specific war is illegal, :roll: Just like there is no specific law that says it is illegal to invade Jim's property. The the law will refer to invading any neighbours property.
If you read the section it is very clear what the role and responsibilities of the UN and its members are so I am afraid you will have to do some of your own research.:D
Are we really the most evil of all foreign powers? [confused edited out]
What have we done to earn such a status? It disturbs me that my country is thought of in this way.
You asked this question I have given you a reason why. The view of the UN and many countries is that the war was illegal. I have provided the links for you to follow. If you choose to believe it or not is up to you but IMHO that is why we are viewed that way.
It is not going to say that specific war is illegal, :roll: Just like there is no specific law that says it is illegal to invade Jim's property. The the law will refer to invading any neighbours property.
If you read the section it is very clear what the role and responsibilities of the UN and its members are so I am afraid you will have to do some of your own research.:D
Where does it say that any war is illegal?
You asked this question I have given you a reason why. The view of the UN and many countries is that the war was illegal. I have provided the links for you to follow. If you choose to believe it or not is up to you but IMHO that is why we are viewed that way.
What respect should the UN command amongst the international community if it idly sits back and let bully boy countries invade smaller ones?
How can the UN make any such claims about illegality of conflicts if it isn't prepared to enforce its own laws? An unenforcable law isn't a law at all.
What respect should the UN command amongst the international community if it idly sits back and let bully boy countries invade smaller ones?
How can the UN make any such claims about illegality of conflicts if it isn't prepared to enforce its own laws? An unenforcable law isn't a law at all.
That is a different point and one that is very valid. There have always been problems. The for years the Superpowers played games and would allow one conflict or another depending on what their political game was. If the big boys don't play who else will.
If any foreign countries want to squable with themselves and it doesnt involve us, we should keep out of it . IMO.
fingalmacool
22-Jun-09, 20:33
I would like to agree with you Rheghead. However, It looks like the leaders here in the USA are getting involved with Iran's problems. Demonstrators appear to be forcing President Obama and his Democrat party to make statements that could cause more problems. So far, UK leaders appear to be keeping hands-off and that ultimately could be a good thing. There are no easy answers to these problems.
Seems to me I could of been wrong slagging off the Americans for messing around in other peoples problems, when it was right under me nose, it was us, The Great British Empire strikes again, sadly not with George Lucus making it up as he went along, its more far fetched than that:confused
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.