So Much for Trying to Appease Iran

ClayShaw

Experienced Member
Reaction score
1
Old Baldy said:
Hopefully Obama will learn and not be so naive when it comes to appeasing radical Muslim States? (He is apparently learning because he blasted Iran for their treatment of protesters.)

They are not our friends and never will be with the totalitarian leaders in control currently IMHO.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090625/wl_ ... ection_204

Oh boy, OldBaldy, here we go again...
What should he do? Pick a fight with Iran??? We obviously can't invade (who would do it?) and there are about 130,000 Americans literally next door, so pissing them off may not be a great idea.
I thought he played it really well. We have a history of messing around with internal politics in that country, and I don't blame the Iranians for not liking that. He shouldn't pick a winner, but he should condemn the violence against the demonstrators.
We're friends, great friends with the Saudi's who are a hell of a lot more totalitarian than Iran (the Saudi's thought they were great people when they let citizens elect powerless mayors a few years ago). One of the reasons Iranians dislike the US is our support for totalitarian Saddam Hussein when he was fighting Iran 25 years ago.
Moussavi/Ahmadineawhatever... it doesn't matter. Talking to them is the only option we have.
 

Hammy070

Established Member
Reaction score
0
I wonder who is doing the appeasing...

The country being threatened or the conglomerate doing the threatening. Iran isn't making any demands on the West for us to appease them.

The protests are wholly internal. They mistakingly are presented in the West as a kind of revolt, a pro-Western revolt. But it's not the case. Mousavvi is the Supreme Leaders' brother-in-law, he studied Islamic Architecture at University and is very much part of the establishment. If you watch the Presidential debates on Iranian TV, the main issue was economics and corruption, not nuclear power, which a vast majority of Iranians according to most polls, are fully supportive of.

But Iran needs to evolve from the one party state. The clerical elite will have to change in many ways to reflect the population more accurately. Coups, forced change does not work for the Persians, not for long. Whether this is the Shah of earlier times, or the Islamic State brought about by the Iranians themselves, they as a people eventually decide when a change is needed.

Hopefully it should involve as little violence as possible. I'd say in comparison to Britain governmentally, they are in about the....1900s. But with twitter and mobile phones it shouldn't take a century hah!
 

ali777

Senior Member
Reaction score
4
Hammy070 said:
The protests are wholly internal. They mistakingly are presented in the West as a kind of revolt, a pro-Western revolt. But it's not the case.

That's exactly what most people do not realise.. The protests are not a revolution, Moussavi doesn't stand for anything different. He still represents the system but he's not Ahmedinejad.

The impression I got is that the Iranians, at least the urban population, aren't happy with the current president and they want a change.
 

The Gardener

Senior Member
Reaction score
25
Well, I agree that the dispute between the two election candidates is clearly a race between two people who are hard line conservatives. My initial reaction to this was that I thought the western media was trying to put a spin on this that might not necessarily be the case... but, when you look at the veracity and persistence of these protests, it's pretty clear to me that a deeper vein of SOMETHING has been tapped into here. There certainly looks to be quite a bit of frustration and dissatisfaction that seems to have been pent up from something.
 

DonaldAnderson

Experienced Member
Reaction score
5
Its good that we finally get a response from obama. Why did it take so long? I think what wouldbe best would be a firm stance that Ahmaninejad has no choice but to respect. Don't know if that is possible though.
 
Top