# Iran's "supreme leader" is losing it



## Chris (Jun 19, 2009)

Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, triggered a diplomatic row today when he publicly singled out "evil" Britain as the foremost enemy of the Islamic republic.

Gordon Brown responded swiftly by condemning Iran's "repression and *brutality" in the strongest language used by the UK yet about last week's disputed presidential poll. Previous public *comments have been *deliberately restrained to avoid fuelling Iranian accusations of interference in its internal affairs.

Iran's ambassador to London was summoned to the Foreign Office after Khamenei's remarks during midday *Friday prayers at Tehran University, where the cleric referred to Britain as "the most evil" of foreign powers. 

Iran's supreme leader Khamenei issues verbal attack on 'evil Britain' | World news | The Guardian


----------



## strollingbones (Jun 19, 2009)

obama needs to step up and say something strong to them and fucking stronger to n korea


----------



## Xenophon (Jun 19, 2009)

Maybe not bones, Chris could be correct that BO not saying something has really undercut the Iranain Mullahs, they can't just knee-jerk blame america and it's having some effect on the riots and protests there.


----------



## Annie (Jun 19, 2009)

strollingbones said:


> obama needs to step up and say something strong to them and fucking stronger to n korea



Well according to Chris, this is all Obama's doing...  

You're right bones, he's been a coward. The House however, has moved:

TheHill.com - House approves Iran bill 405-1



> House approves Iran bill 405-1
> By Ian Swanson
> Posted: 06/19/09 11:51 AM [ET]
> The House overwhelmingly approved a resolution Friday in support of Iranian dissidents as that countrys top cleric warned protesters to end demonstrations.
> ...


----------



## DiveCon (Jun 19, 2009)

WOW the UK replaces the USA as the greatest Satan eh?


----------



## strollingbones (Jun 19, 2009)

point taken.  all we can do is wait and see.


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 19, 2009)

Annie said:


> strollingbones said:
> 
> 
> > obama needs to step up and say something strong to them and fucking stronger to n korea
> ...



That's nice, and it's also politically correct. By doing a simple resolution, which is not a statement of foreign policy, the message gets sent loud and clear that the American people support the Iranian people but without declaring any intent to muddle in their election process.


----------



## Annie (Jun 19, 2009)

MaggieMae said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> > strollingbones said:
> ...



It's what they could do, as the power for foreign affairs lies within the executive branch which has done zilch.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy (Jun 19, 2009)

Obama's approach in this situation has been good.  The Iranians don't need American approval and we don't need to further alienate the Iranian government.


----------



## strollingbones (Jun 19, 2009)

but we do need to encourage the revolution and will we stand by and watch them slaughtered people in the streets....


----------



## Sunni Man (Jun 19, 2009)

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> Obama's approach in this situation has been good.  The Iranians don't need American approval and we don't need to further alienate the Iranian government.


You are absolutly correct  

It's their country, culture, and society. 

They should be left alone, with No interferance from America or anyone else.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy (Jun 19, 2009)

strollingbones said:


> but we do need to encourage the revolution and will we stand by and watch them slaughtered people in the streets....



Why do we need to encourage them?  They're doing just fine without our "moral" support.  As to watching them being slaughtered in the streets, it hasn't happened yet.  There have been crackdowns, but no mass slaughter.


----------



## Annie (Jun 19, 2009)

There shouldn't really be a question of whose side the US is on:

Whose Side Are We On? You Have to Ask? - WSJ.com



> Whose Side Are We On? You Have to Ask?
> With Twitter's help, the youth of Iran take on the ayatollahs.
> By PEGGY NOONAN
> 
> ...



I don't much care for Noonan for several years, but in this case she says it well.


----------



## Baruch Menachem (Jun 19, 2009)

Xenophon said:


> Maybe not bones, Chris could be correct that BO not saying something has really undercut the Iranain Mullahs, they can't just knee-jerk blame america and it's having some effect on the riots and protests there.



Interesting problem, to say the least.


In Iran, like in Cuba, America hatred is the engine that drives the regime.  

I do think that 0bama does need to make it clear that America has learned from its mistakes and values Democracy as the highest goal, and that, as a democratic regime, we find last weekend's farce a bad deal for democracy.   Both of these clowns are bad for America.

Lets not loose sight of the two important facts.  Tweedledum was probably just as bad or worse than tweedeldee.  We have no interesest in which loon is at the button in Iran.   However, we do have an interest in democratic institutions, and we condemn the farce of a dishonest election.


----------



## concept (Jun 19, 2009)

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> Obama's approach in this situation has been good.  The Iranians don't need American approval and we don't need to further alienate the Iranian government.



We alienate them by simply breathing.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy (Jun 19, 2009)

concept said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> > Obama's approach in this situation has been good.  The Iranians don't need American approval and we don't need to further alienate the Iranian government.
> ...



Or maybe it's our aggressive policies toward them.


----------



## DiveCon (Jun 19, 2009)

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> concept said:
> 
> 
> > Kevin_Kennedy said:
> ...


nope, its the fact we arent muslim and have sharia law
and unless we convert, that wont change


----------



## Soaring (Jun 19, 2009)

A couple of things......the VP said in a speech a few days ago that he thought the election was a sham.  In other words, he insinuated that it was rigged.  Now, is Obama going to sit back and let the VP do his talking?  Personally, I don't think we should say a damn thing.  Their people obviously are pissed and are letting the world know their feelings.  If I was the Khomeni (or however you spell it) I would be worried about a real revolution.  A lot of their men were college educated in the United States during the time the Shah was in charge, so they know all about a democratic society.   My college roommate was a Persian.   I can't see this oppressive  government lasting very much longer.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy (Jun 19, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> > concept said:
> ...



I'm guessing that they object more to our meddling in their affairs than what religion we adhere to.


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 19, 2009)

Annie said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > Annie said:
> ...



What are they supposed to "do"?? Get real. It's none of our fucking business how they conduct their elections, nor how they turn out.


----------



## DiveCon (Jun 19, 2009)

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > Kevin_Kennedy said:
> ...


yeah, cause no other countries meddle in others affairs
that is about as lame a fucking excuse as anyone ever puts forth


----------



## DiveCon (Jun 19, 2009)

MaggieMae said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...


wow, on this point i agree
nothing he really can do, partially because nothing he would say would be believable


----------



## Annie (Jun 19, 2009)

MaggieMae said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



Ya know MM, I just can't be bothered wasting any more time on responding to you. You've not a clue to what is in the best interest of the country, unlike many on the left, who do disagree with the right, but use logic. A parameter that is absent from your quiver.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy (Jun 19, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



No one on the level of the United States.  I have no doubt that the Ayatollah and others may continue condemning the U.S. no matter what we do.  However, without any legitimate bread and butter issues they wouldn't be able to rally any serious support.


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 19, 2009)

strollingbones said:


> but we do need to encourage the revolution and will we stand by and watch them slaughtered people in the streets....



The United States needs to stay the hell out of the political *process* of ANY country in the region. Period. In the case of Israel and Palestine, both political factions have asked for the United States to "broker" peace talks. We have absolutely no right to barge in and tell anyone how to conduct their political affairs unless specifically requested to observe or arbitrate.

How would WE like it?


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 19, 2009)

Annie said:


> There shouldn't really be a question of whose side the US is on:
> 
> Whose Side Are We On? You Have to Ask? - WSJ.com
> 
> ...



So there ya go. The Iranians will take care of this themselves. Why should the executive office develop a new "foreign policy" toward Iran just because the reformers didn't win?


----------



## Baruch Menachem (Jun 19, 2009)

Soaring said:


> A couple of things......the VP said in a speech a few days ago that he thought the election was a sham.  In other words, he insinuated that it was rigged.  Now, is Obama going to sit back and let the VP do his talking?  Personally, I don't think we should say a damn thing.  Their people obviously are pissed and are letting the world know their feelings.  If I was the Khomeni (or however you spell it) I would be worried about a real revolution.  A lot of their men were college educated in the United States during the time the Shah was in charge, so they know all about a democratic society.  * My college roommate was a Persian.   I can't see this oppressive  government lasting very much longer*.



From your lips to Allah's ears!


----------



## Sunni Man (Jun 19, 2009)

MaggieMae said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...


Iran is a soverign nation with it's own unique culture and history.

They do not need the U.S. getting into their affairs.

Yes, there are "thousands" protesting the election.

But there are "millions" who are happy with the election of Ahmadinejad.


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 19, 2009)

Soaring said:


> A couple of things......the VP said in a speech a few days ago that he thought the election was a sham.  In other words, he insinuated that it was rigged.  Now, is Obama going to sit back and let the VP do his talking?  Personally, I don't think we should say a damn thing.  Their people obviously are pissed and are letting the world know their feelings.  If I was the Khomeni (or however you spell it) I would be worried about a real revolution.  A lot of their men were college educated in the United States during the time the Shah was in charge, so they know all about a democratic society.   My college roommate was a Persian.   I can't see this oppressive  government lasting very much longer.



Anyone can SAY the election was a sham, but to formulate policy suggesting that because the United States doesn't like the way the election was conducted and therefore Iran better shape up would be downright stupid.


----------



## Soaring (Jun 19, 2009)

The question is not that the reformers didn't win, it's that the reformers got beat illegally.  I don't think there is any question about that, but it is none of our business.  The United States needs to shut the fuck up and back off.  And, that includes our MSM.


----------



## Annie (Jun 19, 2009)

MaggieMae said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> > There shouldn't really be a question of whose side the US is on:
> ...




​


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 19, 2009)

Annie said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > Annie said:
> ...



That's about what it feels like trying to communicate with you.


----------



## Baruch Menachem (Jun 19, 2009)

MaggieMae said:


> Soaring said:
> 
> 
> > A couple of things......the VP said in a speech a few days ago that he thought the election was a sham.  In other words, he insinuated that it was rigged.  Now, is Obama going to sit back and let the VP do his talking?  Personally, I don't think we should say a damn thing.  Their people obviously are pissed and are letting the world know their feelings.  If I was the Khomeni (or however you spell it) I would be worried about a real revolution.  A lot of their men were college educated in the United States during the time the Shah was in charge, so they know all about a democratic society.   My college roommate was a Persian.   I can't see this oppressive  government lasting very much longer.
> ...


I think there are two issues.  One, we really have no business telling people how to run their own affairs.  As noted, we resent it when it comes at us, as it has quite often.  

But there is something different here.  This is the  difference between the neighbor having a punk garage band playing past 7:30 and a drunken boyfriend beating up the girl next door.   

As to what we can do, well not a lot.  We should do as much as we can without making the situation worse though.

So the administration should definitely make sure that the Iranian citizens know we are not on the side of the bad guys for once.


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 19, 2009)

Baruch Menachem said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > Soaring said:
> ...



How could they *NOT* know that? Achmedinijad has been reviled all along by the United States.


----------



## Annie (Jun 19, 2009)

MaggieMae said:


> Baruch Menachem said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...


Your point being regarding the crisis?


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 19, 2009)

Annie said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > Baruch Menachem said:
> ...



These are toughies.


----------



## Annie (Jun 19, 2009)

MaggieMae said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



Please decode 'toughies'.


----------



## Lycurgus (Jun 19, 2009)

Xenophon said:


> Maybe not bones, Chris could be correct that BO not saying something has really undercut the Iranain Mullahs, they can't just knee-jerk blame america and it's having some effect on the riots and protests there.



I have to agree that not making blood public statements right now may actually work in our favor. However, I am not convinced that Obama can act if really called on to do so. He has already given them too much breathing room and the same with N. Korea.


----------



## DiveCon (Jun 20, 2009)

Lycurgus said:


> Xenophon said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe not bones, Chris could be correct that BO not saying something has really undercut the Iranain Mullahs, they can't just knee-jerk blame america and it's having some effect on the riots and protests there.
> ...


since he had already said he would meet with the nutjob without preconditions, what can he really say now that would be taken as serious?


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jun 20, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> Lycurgus said:
> 
> 
> > Xenophon said:
> ...




The leadership in Iran has given no indication they are willing to make any changes in their efforts to develop nuclear weapons or in their support for terrorism, so there seems to be little to lose no matter what Obama says, and I would be happier to see an American president speak up for democracy and human rights rather than to keep his silence to curry favor tyrants.


----------



## Lycurgus (Jun 20, 2009)

toomuchtime_ said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > Lycurgus said:
> ...



Valid points and I don't disagree. I just feel that by him giving some space right now helps those in Iran pushing for change. Nevertheless at some point, he is going to need to stand up and be very blunt and strong on the issue. But, I'll bet he doesn't do it


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 20, 2009)

Annie said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > Annie said:
> ...



[Sigh...]

Beruch said:
*So the administration should definitely make sure that the Iranian citizens know we are not on the side of the bad guys for once.*

To which I said:
*How could they NOT know that? Achmedinijad has been reviled all along by the United States.*

Then you said:
*Your point being regarding the crisis?*

The first statement _deals with _the CURRENT "crisis." My response said, in effect, that the protesting Iranians should already know that the U.S. does NOT support Achmedinejad (the bad guy).

Get it now? I think you just like to stalk me with dumb responses.


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 20, 2009)

toomuchtime_ said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > Lycurgus said:
> ...



He's already done that. But he's not about to say anything that will further escalate civil war in Iran. Or has everyone already forgotten the outcome resulting from all the adventures in Iraq where the U.S. got stuck in the middle of a civil war...


----------



## oreo (Jun 20, 2009)

Watching CNN right now--they are covering what they can.  The state run media is blocking all foreign reporters from covering this big day.  The state run media is not reporting on the protests. Protestors are being blocked,  they are using tear gas, water cannons & clubing to disperse them.  Many of the organizers have already been arrested.  

It looks like the threats from the supreme leader are working.  Crowds are way--way down.

*BUT--here is the change--the protestors who are there are chanting "death to the supreme leader." *This would indicate to me that they want a complete regime change.


----------



## Annie (Jun 20, 2009)

MaggieMae said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



Hardly stalking you. Considering Obama has said there really isn't any difference between the candidate chosen or the one representing the people, as far as him sitting down with and working problems out. 

Now he could have said that the US is always on the side of more freedom and peaceful change. Hmm, so which side would that be?


----------



## oreo (Jun 20, 2009)

MaggieMae said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



It's been reported that the Mullah's & the supreme leader of Iran are already reporting that these protests are sponsored by the United States.


----------



## Sunni Man (Jun 20, 2009)

oreo said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


I am sure they are correct.

And most likely Israel is also involved.


----------



## Annie (Jun 20, 2009)

It's also being reported that the people are now chasing back the police and Mousavi has written a letter that's inspiring people. Little talk anymore about elections, seems to be the mullahs now:

Iran Updates (VIDEO): Live-Blogging The Uprising



> I'm liveblogging the latest Iran election fallout. Email me with any news or thoughts, and scroll down for stories corresponding to the front-page headlines.
> 
> 11:47 AM ET -- More from Twitter: "Crowd rushing to Jihoun St, where people are saying Mousavi is there and talking with protesters"
> 
> ...


----------



## Sunni Man (Jun 20, 2009)

I think that it is terrible that the American government and people are supporting lawless protesters and criminals attacking the legitimate democratically elected government of Iran.


----------



## Annie (Jun 20, 2009)

Twitter pics from Iran:

Twitpic / madyar


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 20, 2009)

Annie said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > Annie said:
> ...



Obama's first comments, June 16, 2009:

_"I think that the democratic process, free speech, the ability for folks to peacefully dissent, all those are universal values and need to be respected." 

But the BBC's Jonathan Beale, in Washington, says the president studiously avoided any comment on the allegations of vote fraud. 

"We respect Iranian sovereignty and want to avoid the United States being the issue inside of Iran," Mr Obama said. _

In an interview with CBS News' Harry Smith Friday, President Obama said he is _"very concerned" with the thrust of the statements made today by the ayatollah about Iran's disputed election results.

"And I'm very concerned based on some of the tenor -- and tone of the statements that have been made -- that the government of Iran recognize that the world is watching," the president told Smith. "And how they approach and deal with people who are, through peaceful means, trying to be heard will, I think, send a pretty clear signal to the international community about what Iran is and -- and is not."_

Maybe he should always check with you first for the politically correct language that would appease Republicans? Are you guys sad that he didn't immediately confirm Iran's "axis of evil" status?


----------



## Chris (Jun 20, 2009)

Zakaria on Iran...

By reaching out to Iran, publicly and repeatedly, President Obama has made it extremely difficult for the Iranian regime to claim that they are battling an aggressive America bent on attacking Iran. In his inaugural address, his New Year greetings, and his Cairo speech, there is a consistent effort to convey respect and friendship for Iranians. That is why Khamenei reacted so angrily to the New Year greeting. It undermined the image of the Great Satan that he routinely paints in his sermons. In his Friday sermon, Khamenei said that the United States, Israel, and especially the United Kingdom were behind the street protests, an accusation that will surely sound ridiculous to most Iranians. The fact that Obama has been cautious in his reaction makes it all the harder for Khamenei and Ahmadinejad to wrap themselves in a nationalist flag.

Zakaria: 'Fatal wound' inflicted on Iranian regime's ideology - CNN.com


----------



## Annie (Jun 20, 2009)

MaggieMae said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



MM, you don't get that he needed to stand with the protestors, not regarding the election, but the right to make demands. That wasn't happening on the 16th and surely isn't today.


----------



## Sunni Man (Jun 20, 2009)

Zakaria is a worm and a sell-out to his people.

Of course Israel is using the spy agencys of the U.S. and Britan to destroy the Iranian government.

The Zionist want a non nuclear Irainian government that is friendly to Israel and believes in the Holohoax.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jun 20, 2009)

MaggieMae said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



That's a truly bizarre statement to suggest that if this president delivered a robust statement in support of democracy and human rights we would end up with 140,000 troops in Iran.  The fact is that Obama has no track record supporting democracy and human rights so the Iranian people have no way of knowing where he stands.  They did know that the Bush administration supported democratic change in Iran, but Obama has made a point of saying all his policies with respect to Iran are different.  The Iranians who have been able to follow Obama's career so far have every reason to think he is interested in what is happening there only so far as it will effect his and his party's political fortunes here.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jun 20, 2009)

oreo said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...



He has quite clearly said that all this trouble has been caused by schemes from the US, UK and Israel, yet some Obama supporters still claim that Obama refuses to take a strong stand in support of democracy and human rights in Iran for fear that the Supreme Leader will say what he has already said.  Baghdad Bob did a better job of trying to explain Saddam's actions than these Obama supporters do of trying to explain Obama's continuing refusal to take a strong stand in support of democracy and human rights in Iran.


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 20, 2009)

Annie said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > Annie said:
> ...



What more do you want him to do? Fly over there and march with them? Uh oh, can't do that. Then he'd be criticized about how much it cost Air Force One to make the trip.

IT IS FUCKING CLEAR THAT HE STANDS WITH THOSE WHO ARE PROTESTING.


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 20, 2009)

Sunni Man said:


> Zakaria is a worm and a sell-out to his people.
> 
> Of course Israel is using the spy agencys of the U.S. and Britan to destroy the Iranian government.
> 
> The Zionist want a non nuclear Irainian government that is friendly to Israel and believes in the Holohoax.



Fahreed Zakaria is *the* most brilliant expert on Mideast geopolitics and is respected by Jews and Arabs uniformly. In my opinion, he should have a top level position with this administration instead of a one-hour show on CNN once a week and a column in Newsweek.


----------



## DiveCon (Jun 20, 2009)

MaggieMae said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...


maggie, you really need to get your head out of Obama's ass, for two reasons, one, so you can get some fresh air for a change, and two, i think he'd like to get a bit closer to being able to sit for a change


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 20, 2009)

toomuchtime_ said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...



Now you're just venturing into bullshit mode. Reza Pahlavi is the son of the former Shah of Iran. And one can assume he knows a helluva lot more about his own people than you do.

Letter to The Honorable Barack Obama
Reza Pahlavi
November 5th, 2008

Dear Mr. President-elect,

It is with a great pleasure that I offer you my heartfelt congratulations on your historic election victory.

This is indeed a proud moment not just for America, but for millions of others around the globe who have come to believe in and aspire for the kind of values that have become universally acknowledged as the hallmarks of American society. Your success is a remarkable reminder of the potential for promoting major change through the ballot box in a free and fair electoral process.

Mr. President-Elect,

*The prospect for change as promised by you has already aroused a great deal of expectation from people everywhere who are hopeful of emulating your example by constructing societies based on peace, freedom, justice and opportunity.

No where is the desire for such change greater than in my homeland, Iran.*

The people of Iran are perhaps amongst the most eager aspirants for the kind of values that have become synonymous with your success in the recent months. Iranians believe that if allowed the opportunity, yes they will.

It is their hope that with your moral and vocal support, they too can pursue their struggle for the realization of their individual liberties and fundamental freedoms along with the restoration of their pride and dignity as human beings.

Wishing you ever increasing success in all your future endeavors,

Yours sincerely,

Reza Pahlavi

///
And here he is commenting on the election.

Pro-Shah Iranians call for regime change - Yahoo! News


----------



## DiveCon (Jun 20, 2009)

MaggieMae said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...


Reza can kiss ass with the best of them
LOL
if you think he is for anything but his own self interest, you are far more deluded than i have previously thought
Reza is hoping to get back to the power his Dad had


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 20, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > Annie said:
> ...



Ain't gonna happen, asshole, until you can prove me wrong. How about trying to do that for a change instead of calling me names constantly?


----------



## DiveCon (Jun 20, 2009)

MaggieMae said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...


of course it aint gonna happen
LOL

you are quite firmly ensconced


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 20, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...



I've never seen you post anything indicating the slightest knowledge about any issue. So why would anyone give a shit whether you bend over for an ass kiss on this one?


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 20, 2009)

And...drum roll please...the lone nay vote on the House Resolution was *RON PAUL!!*

You know, the guy all you "new" anti-Bush/anti-Obama folks seem to support, maybe, sorta.
_

"It seems our criticism is selective and applied when there are political points to be made," Paul said. "I have admired President Obama's cautious approach to the situation in Iran and I would have preferred that we in the House had acted similarly."
Paul's full floor statement:

I rise in reluctant opposition to H Res 560, which condemns the Iranian government for its recent actions during the unrest in that country. While I never condone violence, much less the violence that governments are only too willing to mete out to their own citizens, I am always very cautious about "condemning" the actions of governments overseas. As an elected member of the United States House of Representatives, I have always questioned our constitutional authority to sit in judgment of the actions of foreign governments of which we are not representatives. I have always hesitated when my colleagues rush to pronounce final judgment on events thousands of miles away about which we know very little. And we know very little beyond limited press reports about what is happening in Iran.

Of course I do not support attempts by foreign governments to suppress the democratic aspirations of their people, but when is the last time we condemned Saudi Arabia or Egypt or the many other countries where unlike in Iran there is no opportunity to exercise any substantial vote on political leadership? It seems our criticism is selective and applied when there are political points to be made. I have admired President Obama's cautious approach to the situation in Iran and I would have preferred that we in the House had acted similarly.

I adhere to the foreign policy of our Founders, who advised that we not interfere in the internal affairs of countries overseas. I believe that is the best policy for the United States, for our national security and for our prosperity. I urge my colleagues to reject this and all similar meddling resolutions._


----------



## DiveCon (Jun 20, 2009)

MaggieMae said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...


you are such a dumb fuck
you didnt even read the article you linked to, did you?
Reza wants a retuyrn to a monachy, with HIM as the monach
read what you post, moron


----------



## Sunni Man (Jun 20, 2009)

MaggieMae said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> > Zakaria is a worm and a sell-out to his people.
> ...


Fahreed Zakaria is nothing but a political hack for the neocons and a tool of the Zionists.

He is an Indian, so the Arabs could care less what nonsense he spews.


----------



## elvis (Jun 20, 2009)

MaggieMae said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



for you, knowledge=putting your head up obama's ass, so I can see why you think Dive has little knowledge.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jun 20, 2009)

MaggieMae said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



If Obama could give up his boneheaded dream that Ahmadinejad and Khamenei might soon come slavering over his outstretched hand, he could say:

"It is clear that a great many Iranians have lost confidence in the present system's performance in conducting and verifying the election, and this strikes right at the heart of any democratic system.  In the hope of restoring the Iranian people's confidence in their election system and of protecting and nurturing the democratic rights of the Iranian people and of preventing escalating violence and bloodshed and in the hope of preventing harsh repressive measures that will further damage the fabric of democracy in Iran, the United States strongly believes that an independent panel of election experts from the United Nations should be given access to examine the ballots and all other materials pertinent to the election and to investigate complaints in order to determine if irregularities in the recent election were minor and did not effect the announced outcome or if the irregularities were so great that a new election must be held in order to preserve democracy in Iran."

Since there is clearly no hope the present regime will yield anything on nuclear weapons or their sponsorship of terrorism, if this statement should further alienate the present regime, nothing has been lost, and if the opposition should come to power, despite the fact Obama seems to believe there is little difference between Mousavi and Ahmadinejad on these issues, such a statement by Obama would give the US a more favorable image among Mousavi's supporters and that might give Mousavi a political reason to be more accommodating with the West.

In either case, such a statement would firmly establish the Obama administration as a strong supporter of democratic rights of people everywhere instead of leaving us looking like mealy mouthed appeasers of tyrants.


----------



## Annie (Jun 20, 2009)

Indeed and the events are getting ahead of him. Either the regime will crush the opposition, so then Obama is going to sit down with them? OR the regime will fall and we will be the last country to officially stand for more freedom.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jun 20, 2009)

MaggieMae said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



Just what goes on between your ears?  I responded to your claim that a strong statement by Obama in support of the protesters would leave the US in the middle of a civil war just as it did in Iraq, you go off on a tangent about the Shah's son.  Are you genuinely unable to stay on topic because of some disability or are you changing topics because you realized how ridiculous your claim was?


----------



## Annie (Jun 20, 2009)

However, in front of White House there is now a demonstration in favor of the protestors, over 2k. Perhaps he'll hear? I mean after all, he has no problem standing with the Palestinians.


----------



## sarahgop (Jun 20, 2009)

obama thinks  we are the  great satan


----------



## Sunni Man (Jun 20, 2009)

sarahgop said:


> obama thinks  we are the  great satan


The Z.O.G. is the great satan


----------



## elvis (Jun 20, 2009)

Sunni Man said:


> sarahgop said:
> 
> 
> > obama thinks  we are the  great satan
> ...



Thank you for your contribution, Adolf.


----------



## Annie (Jun 20, 2009)

CNN reporting 19 dead, hundreds hurt:

At least 19 dead in Iran unrest, hospital sources say - CNN.com



> At least 19 dead in Iran unrest, hospital sources say
> 
> Story Highlights
> *NEW: Hospitals say 19 killed; unconfirmed reports put toll as high as 150
> ...


----------



## jreeves (Jun 20, 2009)

Annie said:


> strollingbones said:
> 
> 
> > obama needs to step up and say something strong to them and fucking stronger to n korea
> ...



I know I might burst into flames but I agree with Obama's position when it comes to Iran. Don't give the Mullahs an easy escapegoat, let the citizenry of Iran see the Mullahs for what they really are....


----------



## Annie (Jun 20, 2009)

jreeves said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> > strollingbones said:
> ...



I've seen you say that before. Support for the people and for freedom is what America does. Sending troops/special forces? No.


----------



## jreeves (Jun 20, 2009)

Annie said:


> jreeves said:
> 
> 
> > Annie said:
> ...



America should stay


----------



## Annie (Jun 20, 2009)

jreeves said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> > jreeves said:
> ...



We disagree, had to happen sometime.


----------



## DiveCon (Jun 20, 2009)

Annie said:


> jreeves said:
> 
> 
> > Annie said:
> ...


i dont think we need to send in anyone
but frankly, anything Obama says will effect nothing over there
when he proclaimed he would meet them without preconditions, he lost any credibility he could have had


----------



## jreeves (Jun 20, 2009)

Annie said:


> jreeves said:
> 
> 
> > Annie said:
> ...



yep


----------



## jreeves (Jun 20, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> > jreeves said:
> ...



Another reason, America should stay


----------



## Chris (Jun 20, 2009)

When Obama said he would meet the Iranians without preconditions he destroyed the Mullah's mythology.

Obama is a brilliant politician. He beat the Clintons, the Republicans, and now the Muslim extremists.


----------



## elvis (Jun 20, 2009)

Chris said:


> When Obama said he would meet the Iranians without preconditions he destroyed the Mullah's mythology.
> 
> Obama is a brilliant politician. He beat the Clintons, the Republicans, and now the Muslim extremists.



you tell em, Lewinsky.


----------



## Sunni Man (Jun 20, 2009)

Chris said:


> Obama is a brilliant politician. He beat the Muslim extremists.



I guess I missed this on the news

When did this happen????


----------



## Chris (Jun 20, 2009)

Sunni Man said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Obama is a brilliant politician. He beat the Muslim extremists.
> ...



It is happening at this very moment in Iran, Pakistan, Lebanon, etc....


----------



## elvis (Jun 20, 2009)

Sunni Man said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Obama is a brilliant politician. He beat the Muslim extremists.
> ...



During one of chris' wet dreams about Obama.


----------



## elvis (Jun 20, 2009)

Chris said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



all the while you're choking on Obama's dick.


----------



## DiveCon (Jun 20, 2009)

Sunni Man said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Obama is a brilliant politician. He beat the Muslim extremists.
> ...


it didn't, Chris is a delusional moron


----------



## Chris (Jun 20, 2009)

elvis3577 said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Sunni Man said:
> ...



Don't put me in your fantasies.....


----------



## elvis (Jun 20, 2009)

Chris said:


> elvis3577 said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



It's not fantasy.  It's reality.  we are all watching it unfold on this board currently.  so does Obama taste better than clinton?  Nik wants to know.


----------



## DiveCon (Jun 20, 2009)

elvis3577 said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > elvis3577 said:
> ...


Nik already knows


----------



## Chris (Jun 20, 2009)

elvis3577 said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > elvis3577 said:
> ...



It is creepy that you have gay fantasies about me.

It borders on harassment.


----------



## elvis (Jun 20, 2009)

Chris said:


> elvis3577 said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



You wanna ask Gunny if he thinks I've been harassing you?


----------



## Chris (Jun 20, 2009)

elvis3577 said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > elvis3577 said:
> ...



Gunny? 

Now you want to bring Gunny into your fantasy?


----------



## elvis (Jun 20, 2009)

Chris said:


> elvis3577 said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Didn't think so, chickenshit.


----------



## Chris (Jun 20, 2009)

elvis3577 said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > elvis3577 said:
> ...



People who are abusive learned this behavior as children.

You can change if you try.


----------



## DiveCon (Jun 20, 2009)

Chris said:


> elvis3577 said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


you really need that professional help


----------



## elvis (Jun 20, 2009)

Chris said:


> elvis3577 said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



AW, am I abusing you?  Isn't Old Roxy there to kiss it and make it better?  Aw. poor little chrissy.


----------

