1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Religious leaders ban 30 women from running for Iran's presidency

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by Mathloom, May 18, 2013.

Tags:
Page 2 of 2
  1. Rocket River

    Rocket River Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 1999
    Messages:
    65,255
    Likes Received:
    32,972
    Loosening sactions . . . etc. . . I am fine with it
    but
    I am partially sick of American trying to manipulate/install their ideals on other groups.
    We are not the world police or authority on what is moral and right
    and I get concerned when we go into places looking to 'social engineer' their
    society to our whims and needs and wants.

    I D*mn sure hate it when we try and do with a gun in hand

    Rocket River
     
    #21 Rocket River, May 22, 2013
    1 person likes this.
  2. Kojirou

    Kojirou Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,180
    Likes Received:
    281
    Uh, no. First, Mathloon, I'm fairly certain I've seen you play the "Dinner Jacket is just a figurehead so there's no need to pay attention to him but rather to the Supreme Leader" card in the past. It's something I agree with myself, but it also means that regardless of who gets elected, fundamental policy in Iran is not going to change.

    Second, the right Iranian candidate from an American perspective has utterly no chance of being elected in the first place, just as the right American candidate from an Iranian perspective isn't. At absolutely bare minimum, America wants an Iranian leader who isn't going to pick fights with Israel, and you know perfectly well that isn't going to happen, much less weaken the nuclear program. Neither America nor Iran are good or evil, there are simply incompatible interests relating to Middle Eastern security.

    Finally, I'm not getting your arguments for loosening sanctions. Given that Americans barely care about the wealth gap in their own country, why would we care in the slightest about it in Iran? And the fact that it hasn't worked completely ( and it has had an effect) does not stand as a reason to completely remove it, since it does pressure Iran. If you stand against the American hegemony, this is pretty much what happens.
    People as short-sighted as they are need to stop conflating the Bush Doctrine with American policy in the Middle East since the end of the Second World War/decolonization. We are not looking to do any sort of social engineering at all.
     
    #22 Kojirou, May 22, 2013
  3. Deckard

    Deckard Blade Runner
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    57,792
    Likes Received:
    41,232
    Come on, Mathloom. The real problem is the vicious theocratic dictatorship, hiding behind its sham of a democracy, kept in power with its gang of thugs, busy getting rich while they spew religious mumbo jumbo. Get rid of the regime and free the people of Iran, the majority of her people being beyond sick of the religious fanaticism. The people of Iran are not "the problem." The problem is the religious dictatorship, a theocracy hanging onto power with both hands.
     
    #23 Deckard, May 23, 2013
  4. Mathloom

    Mathloom Shameless Optimist

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2008
    Messages:
    21,112
    Likes Received:
    22,573
    The President is just a figure head, but could potentially spearhead change in the future. This is why Mousavi and Karroubi and Rafsanjani's kids are under arrest right now, and why Rafsanjani and Mashaie were disqualified from the race.

    Not a single person in that list is going to be perfect - far from it. But they could, intentionally or unintentionally, bring about change to supreme leadership. Mousavi is a great example of that - people forget, the guy is no freedom fighter. He supports the Islamic Republic and was considered a loyalist after his decades of loyalty. It's not like the guy wants to set Iranians free, he just wants more liberal policies for the President.

    But a Mousavi can heavily reduce tensions. Absolutely no doubt about it. A Jalili can heavily inflame the situation - as he most certainly will when/if he wins this thing.

    The right candidate from an AMERICA perspective or the right candidate from an AMERICAN perspective? These are not the same. IMO from an America perspective a Mousavi is the best option ever. From an American people perspective, there is no material difference between Mousavi and Ahmedinejjad.

    Americans care about the wealth gap in their own country. Let me know what kind of study/figures would convince you of this. The negative effects of wealth gap have been discussed ad nauseum on this board so if you don't think it's a problem now, you never will. In the case of Iran, the sanctions are meant to put pressure on the government and the leadership - which it is not doing. Instead it is creating a wealth gap and security situation which is unifying the cracks in the Iranian leadership and making Iranians less likely to bring about change.

    Finally, you plan and execute social engineering. There is no debate there, I would find it insulting to even debate that with you seeing as even the words "social engineering" are understatements.
     
    #24 Mathloom, May 23, 2013
  5. DaDakota

    DaDakota Balance wins
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 1999
    Messages:
    129,248
    Likes Received:
    39,756
    Iran's government sucks balls.

    DD
     
    #25 DaDakota, May 23, 2013
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 2 of 2

Share This Page