Beaucaire From Syria, joined Sep 2003, 5252 posts, RR: 26 Posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1443 times:
Former reform President Mohammad Khatami has announced today he would be running in the next Iranian presidential elections .
He was so far expected to step aside and rather endorse his reformist-contender,Mir-Hossein Moussavi .It's now certain he will take on the challenge to oust current hardliner Ahmadi-Nejad. Should Mir-Hosein Moussavi run as well,it would open a fascinating picture of Iranian political maturity.
At least that's some encouraging news from a country that usually serves rather de-motivating headlines..
Klaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 20860 posts, RR: 55 Reply 1, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1428 times:
Not suprising, all in all. With Ahmadinejad's favourite bogeyman retired and the economic crisis looming large, he'll be on the defensive trying to explain to his population where his rabid confrontations are supposed to be going now...!
IH8BY From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1117 posts, RR: 3 Reply 2, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1428 times:
I'd be interested to see how Ayatollah Khamenei sits on this issue, given his influence on the Iranian public. Khatami's a cleric, whereas Ahmadinejad isn't, but then again the latter is the more conservative-leaning (relatively) of the two. Moussavi could complicate things somewhat - I wonder whether it might in fact play into Ahmadinejad's hands.
I agree with Klaus that Ahmadinejad may find distracting the Iranian public with anti-American rhetoric a little more difficult now, and may lose his sheen somewhat.
[Edited 2009-02-08 09:11:20]
Have you ever felt like you could float into the sky / like the laws of physics simply don't apply?
Kaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 11958 posts, RR: 37 Reply 3, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 1345 times:
Quoting Beaucaire (Thread starter): Should Mir-Hosein Moussavi run as well,it would open a fascinating picture of Iranian political maturity.
It would risk splitting the moderate vote; much better for the two to agree and Moussavi could get a senior position in Khatami's cabinet.
What about Larijani; is he still running? He is more moderate than Ahmedinejad (not hard!), but still regarded as something as a hardliner?
And isn't Rafsanjani running too?
Obviously, the west's favourite choice would be Khatami, but this could also work against him (and no doubt be used against him). Is there a possibility that Khamenei could stop Khatami from running?
Beaucaire From Syria, joined Sep 2003, 5252 posts, RR: 26 Reply 4, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 1336 times:
Ahmedinejad unfortunately has the means to bias the methodology of the vote by monopolizing the public media.It would be oxygen for the people of Iran if that fool would be voted out of office.A modernized Syria and Iran would bring so much more stability to world-politics .The greater dangers in my opinion would come from a new hardline government in Jerusalem ..
MadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10243 posts, RR: 40 Reply 5, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 1330 times:
My idea is that a hard liner chosen to be the new Israeli Prime Minister will be far more risky for the regional situation than Ahmadinejad being re-elected in Iran. Iran has no intention of attacking Israel. What Ahmadinejad said is just big talk. Israel will attack Iran first chance they get, with or without support from the U.S.
There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
Kaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 11958 posts, RR: 37 Reply 6, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 1325 times:
Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 5): What Ahmadinejad said is just big talk. Israel will attack Iran first chance they get, with or without support from the U.S.
Not if there is a rational and sane leader in Iran; I'd have absolutely no sympathy for Iran if Israel attacked them, because Ahmedinejad has been constantly baiting them in the most abusive and offensive terms for the past few years. A new, sane and forward looking Iranian leader would be able to take a sensible, pragmatic view of the world and the changes Iran needs to make. Of course, it won't be an easy course (as Khatami found last time), but I think that there will be recognition that the Ahmedinejad era in Iran needs to buried as soon as possible.
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11714 posts, RR: 52 Reply 7, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 1317 times:
Quoting Beaucaire (Reply 4): Ahmedinejad unfortunately has the means to bias the methodology of the vote by monopolizing the public media.It would be oxygen for the people of Iran if that fool would be voted out of office.A modernized Syria and Iran would bring so much more stability to world-politics .
Are there any unofficial polling to indicate which way the Iranian people are leaning?
Quoting Beaucaire (Reply 4): The greater dangers in my opinion would come from a new hardline government in Jerusalem ..
Actually, the greater danger is some nut case in Iran beginning to throw nukes around the middle east. The Persians and Arabs may share the same religion (Islam), but most are opposing sects (Sunni and Shi'a), so Sunni's in most of the middle east are just as likely to be on the receiving end of an Iranian nuke as the Jews are in Israel.
MadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10243 posts, RR: 40 Reply 8, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 1316 times:
Quoting Kaitak (Reply 6): I think that there will be recognition that the Ahmedinejad era in Iran needs to buried as soon as possible.
The people of Iran will decide on who they want as their new leader.
Let's just hope they will make a wise choice.
There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
Connies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 3857 posts, RR: 13 Reply 11, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 1170 times:
Quoting Klaus (Reply 1): Not suprising, all in all. With Ahmadinejad's favourite bogeyman retired and the economic crisis looming large, he'll be on the defensive trying to explain to his population where his rabid confrontations are supposed to be going now...!
Quite. A common device amongst demagogues is to divert public opinion from domestic problems by giving them a foreign devil. I think Obama's offer of a meeting sort of calls Mr. A's bluff.
Quoting Beaucaire (Reply 4): Ahmedinejad unfortunately has the means to bias the methodology of the vote by monopolizing the public media.It would be oxygen for the people of Iran if that fool would be voted out of office.A modernized Syria and Iran would bring so much more stability to world-politics .The greater dangers in my opinion would come from a new hardline government in Jerusalem ..
Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 5): My idea is that a hard liner chosen to be the new Israeli Prime Minister will be far more risky for the regional situation than Ahmadinejad being re-elected in Iran. Iran has no intention of attacking Israel. What Ahmadinejad said is just big talk. Israel will attack Iran first chance they get, with or without support from the U.S.
If Bibi is the PM, esp. if Lieberman is in the government, this is more likely than not. And Bibi cannot afford to buckle to what will be ferocious US pressure, in order not to look like the putz he is.
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 7): Actually, the greater danger is some nut case in Iran beginning to throw nukes around the middle east. The Persians and Arabs may share the same religion (Islam), but most are opposing sects (Sunni and Shi'a), so Sunni's in most of the middle east are just as likely to be on the receiving end of an Iranian nuke as the Jews are in Israel.
Even if Iran has enough HEU to make a bomb, they are still quite some way from doing it. And they won't be able to test it. And they still have to deliver it, delivery as a bomb is probably out of the question given the IDF superiority, so it has to be a missile. Developing a nose cone that will arm the bomb well after launch, evade the Israeli Arrow ABM, and then explode at the right altitude is no small feat. It took your nation and the Russians quite a while to get it done.
WunalaYann From Australia, joined Mar 2005, 2839 posts, RR: 31 Reply 12, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1153 times:
Quoting Connies4ever (Reply 11): Even if Iran has enough HEU to make a bomb, they are still quite some way from doing it. And they won't be able to test it. And they still have to deliver it, delivery as a bomb is probably out of the question given the IDF superiority, so it has to be a missile. Developing a nose cone that will arm the bomb well after launch, evade the Israeli Arrow ABM, and then explode at the right altitude is no small feat. It took your nation and the Russians quite a while to get it done.
Agreed.
Although we tend to forget part 1 of any discussion regarding the hypothetical launch of a nuclear attack by any country onto any other party - who on Earth would be mad enough to decide to be wiped off the face the of the planet just to prove a point?
I cannot stop shaking my head in disbelief at the persistant accusations that some regimes would be willing to resort to nuclear weapons in an unprovoked fashion, and that includes Iran and North Korea. These highly scrutinised nations know that the slightest hint of the a launch of a missile, nuclear or not, will result in their immediate, instantaneous and irreversible extermination.
The powers-that-be in Tehran, Islamabad, Pyongyang, Khartoum or Damas are exactly that - powers-that-be who very much wish to remain so. They are bloody, corrupt, cynical, authoritarian, backwards fascist regimes, but their main motivation remains to stay in power. And for that to happen, they need an actual country to run, not a field of ruins blanketed in nuclear winter.
Alias1024 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 2644 posts, RR: 2 Reply 13, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1145 times:
Quoting Kaitak (Reply 3): It would risk splitting the moderate vote; much better for the two to agree and Moussavi could get a senior position in Khatami's cabinet.
That is my concern as well. A united front and coherent message is vitally important if reform candidates are going to stand a chance of winning. I repeat of 2005 would be a disaster for moderates. Another second round election between conservatives and hard-line conservatives would likely only serve to give Ahmedinejad another four years and the hard-liners more political capital.
I wonder though if it might actually be better for Khatami to throw his support behind Moussavi. Khatami swept into office on a promise of reform but was unable to deliver many of his promises with the Guardian Council vetoing about 1/3 of what he did. I wonder if Iranians will vote for four more years of government gridlock. At least a new reformer can make the claim that they will have more success getting their policies past the Supreme Leader and Guardian Council, whether it's true or not.
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems with just potatoes.
Sponsor Message: 
From Syria, joined Sep 2003, 5252 posts, 
From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 20860 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1117 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 11958 posts, 
From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10243 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11714 posts, 
From Albania, joined Jan 2009, 2410 posts, 
From Spain, joined Sep 2005, 1418 posts, 
From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 3857 posts, 
From Australia, joined Mar 2005, 2839 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
