Guest alex Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 I know why they are doing it. They have been careful not to accuse the US directly but instead the 'instruments of western imperialism'. The Brits have got in the neck directly, there was a very fervent anti-british protest at Tehran university last week. Wouldnt surprise me though if there had been some covert politcial activity in the country over the past few years, its part of our MO. We're mistrusted due to historical reasons (our own fault tbf) probably more than any other foreign power (along with the US) which makes us an easy target, especially due to the point Fop made re: the US and Obama seeking dialogue (and not being Bush), etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 The ringleaders have been promised playstations and small consignments of porn apparently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 The ringleaders have been promised playstations and small consignments of porn apparently. A bit like the Islamic revolutionaries then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Castell 0 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 We're getting accused of interfering as the establishment in Iran want to deflect from their own actions as they try to regain control of the country. We did do it in 1953 by ousting a ruler when he nationalised the oil, but not this time. I think the bloke who 'lost' the election unleashed a force he can't fully control as the population have been releasing all the pent up anger over the economic situation, the intolerance of the authorities etc. that has been building up for years. The 'loser' is part of a power battle between two camps who want to keep the current system. However, things may even transpire to sweep the Islamic revolution away. It is building towards a remake of the Champ de Mars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 We're getting accused of interfering as the establishment in Iran want to deflect from their own actions as they try to regain control of the country. We did do it in 1953 by ousting a ruler when he nationalised the oil, but not this time. I think the bloke who 'lost' the election unleashed a force he can't fully control as the population have been releasing all the pent up anger over the economic situation, the intolerance of the authorities etc. that has been building up for years. The 'loser' is part of a power battle between two camps who want to keep the current system. However, things may even transpire to sweep the Islamic revolution away. It is building towards a remake of the Champ de Mars. Hopefully it would be a lot less bloody and a lot quicker than the French could manage. A genuinely open (even if not exactly overtly friendly) Iran as the potential to change a lot of things in the area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob W 0 Posted June 24, 2009 Author Share Posted June 24, 2009 hey parky! your new picture have any significance? are you going into the pseudo medical business again?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 Looking like the iron fist will win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 (edited) hey parky! your new picture have any significance? are you going into the pseudo medical business again?? Where there is discord I bring peace, where there is fear I bring calm, where there is mischief I bring...err...more mischief. Edited June 24, 2009 by Park Life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 Brave? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 Another piece in the puzzle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 UK embassy staff held. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11080 Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 It's a rather terrifying way for them to divert attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 It's a rather terrifying way for them to divert attention. It's clever. They are creating a fight where there is none, just to be able to point fingers and say "look they started it". The way the UK is view in Iran means they'll get the reaction they want there no matter how daft it looks to outsiders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11080 Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 Do you reckon they've abandoned attacking the US(verbally) is a direct reaction to Obama's rhetoric on middle eastern policy? It seems strange to shift attention away from their old enemy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 Do you reckon they've abandoned attacking the US(verbally) is a direct reaction to Obama's rhetoric on middle eastern policy? It seems strange to shift attention away from their old enemy? Hard to attack the USA now (both because of what Obama has said on Iran and because Obama is Obama) and they know it. The UK (and the British in general) is viewed in an almost pantomime villain caricature way in Iran (imagine the sneaky, untrustworthy arab-esq cartoon caricature from history - that's how Iranians tend to view the British), so although the USA has been the most effective protagonist for a long time for them to use (certainly under Bush, but pretty much since the revolution) the UK is a good and effective back up for them that plays very well internally without the problems they'd get themselves into trying to use the USA/Obama in their traditional role presently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11080 Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 Pretty impressive that despite no tangible action, a man has had such an impact on the foreign policy of a less than progressive nation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 Pretty impressive that despite no tangible action, a man has had such an impact on the foreign policy of a less than progressive nation. Doubt it will last, as much as anything because Obama won't be seen as being too friendly too a nation that so blatantly rigged their own election. In fact their whole nuclear deal is possibly largely about this, that is getting a reaction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11080 Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 He's already come out to condemn the actions, but he's stopped short of calling for more (toothless) sanctions. What can he realistically do other than apply pressure on the nations with whom Iran actually has a relationship? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 He's already come out to condemn the actions, but he's stopped short of calling for more (toothless) sanctions. What can he realistically do other than apply pressure on the nations with whom Iran actually has a relationship? They (the USA) still haven't really criticised Iran, they've at best/worst indirectly criticised the situation. But eventually there will come a point where they have to directly oppose a position (or maybe Obama will be weaker in world wide public opinion, or both) and then it will be back to the status quo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11080 Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 I thought he got behind his podium and stated that he was horrified and that he categorically condems the violent actions against the population of Iran? You don't think that some of the more moderate (less zealous would maybe be a better phrase) clerics will put pressure on the big dogs? That they'll use this as a tipping point? I saw something on the Daily Show where the Iranian American they were interviewing (he wrote The Cosmic War.. something Aslam I think) said that Iran is on a knife edge, it could go either way and become North Korea (isolationist and militaristic), or China (still pretty isolationist but a little more open to outside influences) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 I thought he got behind his podium and stated that he was horrified and that he categorically condems the violent actions against the population of Iran? They certainly weren't doing that (by choice) initially, think he has said he's appalled at the violence/deaths (given the nature of that youtube video a fairly safe statement - although Dinnerjacket still used this statement to compare him to Bush straight afterwards ), but not questioned the election directly at all. Although he has praised Mousavi (again in an indirectly manner) - although that is slightly ironic as his motivation seems to be a combination of raw political ambitions combined with an attempted to re-jig the Islamic Revolution for a young and more Westernised Iranian population, not over throw it or anything. You don't think that some of the more moderate (less zealous would maybe be a better phrase) clerics will put pressure on the big dogs? That they'll use this as a tipping point? I saw something on the Daily Show where the Iranian American they were interviewing (he wrote The Cosmic War.. something Aslam I think) said that Iran is on a knife edge, it could go either way and become North Korea (isolationist and militaristic), or China (still pretty isolationist but a little more open to outside influences) The whole thing (not the voter anger, but the reason it was rigged how it was) may well be a power struggle between clerics (Rafsanjani), but at the end of the day there can only ever be one winner in that situation, unless the whole country does go up like a power keg, which is looking unlikely now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11080 Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 Have you seen the Daily shows Jason Jones over in Iran? He was there during the election, but a lot of the pieces show a side of Iran I certainly didn't know exist. for one, the women are tip-top. I mean, obviously it's a satirical show, but it did show a side I was unaware of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 Looking rather like they have "won" this now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 They (Iran) are already trying to make mileage from the election fiasco. Now trying to used it as ammunition against the EU for their nuclear program....... it would be laughable if it wasn't likely to work. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8128858.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob W 0 Posted July 2, 2009 Author Share Posted July 2, 2009 They (Iran) are already trying to make mileage from the election fiasco. Now trying to used it as ammunition against the EU for their nuclear program....... it would be laughable if it wasn't likely to work. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8128858.stm The nuclear programme?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now