Comments for Obama confirms that the United States will not be “meddling” in Iran’s Contested Election »
Posted By WikiMap 6 months, 2 weeks ago in NewsAt a press conference on Tuesday, President Barack Obama expressed his "deep concerns" for Iran's struggles resulting from its contested election which allowed Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to remain in power. Obama confirmed his belief of a dispute in balloting but left the comments about investigating the election controversy to Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah ali Khamenei.
Read Full Story at mychannelnews.info »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 106
-
94%
myfairlady6 months, 2 weeks ago
-
38%
Thinker226 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
No matter what the US will do there will be some yelling that the US WAS 'meddling' in the issue for the simple reason the US is only military superpower on the planet and it's very convenient to blame the US and its allies for everything.
Reply
A pretty convincing example is the popular accusation of the US for Iranian support of Hezbollah, Hamas and other terrorist organizations because the US allegedly helped the Iranian Shah to get the power in Iran 56 years ago... despite the fact that the Shah himself as well as ALL his aids and supporters were IRANIANS.
Neither the US nor any other state can ignore the existence of other countries for as long as these countries share the same planet Earth. Anything BUT ignoring the existence of other states can be seen as 'meddling' in their issues. -
93%
UnusualSuspect6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
And why should we "meddle"?
Reply
The US loves to remind the world that we promote democracy, so when a country like Iran has elections, we should let them let solve it themselves.
We're not the policeman of the world, as much as we'd like to think we are...-
50%
Thinker226 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
> we should let them let solve it themselves.
Reply
As long as the Iranians like the results of their elections and as long as they do not 'meddle' (and I mean REALLY) in other countries' issues letting them to solve their problems themselves if fine with me.
I do have some troubles with suggestions to let Iranian leaders to continue their nuclear program and then use the weapons obtained as a result against other states.
> We're not the policeman of the world, as much as we'd like to think we are...
One does not have to be a 'policeman' in order to fight back if attacked or even to help his/her friends and relatives to defend themselves. France and Britain were not 'policemen' when they've declared a war on Germany in Septembeer, 1939. The US was not a 'policeman' as well when it helped France, Britain and the Soviet Union to fight the Nazis.
Allowing Iran to develop nuclear weapons will inevitably lead to a large scale war in the Middle East which will not only certainly result in an unprecedented world-wide economical crisis but will have a lot of other unpredictable consequences. Do you really believe that the US should sit idle and wait for this to happen?-
14%
Georgia506 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hi Thinker. Long time no see.
Reply
I guess we need to sit back and not meddle in Iran's affairs so they can get on with the task of arming terrorists with nukes and wiping Israel off the map.
And it appears we owe South Africa an apology for meddling in their affairs. I will now hold my breath....-
50%
Thinker226 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
> And it appears we owe South Africa an apology for meddling in their affairs.
Reply
No way. South African racists were bad guys so it was acceptable to meddle in their afrairs. It is also, apparently, acceptable to meddle in the affairs of Israel because of the "apartheid" regime there... -
100%
UnusualSuspect6 months, 2 weeks ago
-
Neutral
Thinker226 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
> Sitting down with Iranians about their nuclear program is quite different...
Reply
Of course. You would not suggest to talk about the nuclear program with those who may be removed from power tomorrow because their election appears to be suspicious to the masses and Western media?
Only when Ahmadinejad (and I have no doubts that it will be Ahmadinejad) will finalize his grip on power in Iran adn the election turmoil will be behind us... only THEN it will make some sense to "sit down with Iranians about their nuclear program". I suspect, however, that the Iranians will not be eager to join these talks.-
100%
jovial6 months, 2 weeks ago
-
Neutral
Thinker226 months, 2 weeks ago
-
100%
jovial6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If Israel wants to do something about Iran let THEM do it. Why do we have to keep getting entangled in wars to satisfy Israel's needs. Israel told us with no remorse the other day to butt out of their internal politics. I hear a lot of people "cheerleading" the U.S. to get involved with aggression in Iran. I think if Israel feels threatened to such a great extent they should invade Iran. That's how they felt about Lebanon and Gaza and they invaded. What's stopping them now?
Reply-
33%
Thinker226 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You should read something about Israel, Iran and, possibly, other countries and subjects in order to not make a fool of yourself THAT frequently, Jovial.
Reply
For starters, you will be amazed to discover that Israel DOES feel threatened because Iranian leaders declared on multiple occasions their intentions to "erase" Israel from the map or simply destroy it. Considering the hundreds of nuclear-capable Iranian missiles combined with their nuclear program one has to be an idiot to believe that Iranian leaders are not planning to attack Israel ot at least blackmail Israel and the rest of the world into complying with Iranian demands.
You will be amazed even more to discover that Israel can not 'invade' Iran for many different reasons. First, Iran does not have a common border with Israel meaning that Israeli invasion forces will have to go through at least one Arab country (Syria, Jordan and Iraq) to reach Iran which is 900 kilometers from Israel at the closest point.
Second, Iran is a large country 80 (yes, EIGHTY) times as large as Israel with population about 12 times as large as the population of Israel. These three reasons (distance, size and absence of a common border) make Israeli invasion to Iran an impossibility.
Excluding invasion of ground forces and considering that Israeli air force while being top-notch technically is rather small in numbers and not equipped well for the long distances involved means that Israel has very few options left to fight back in case Iranian leaders will decide to make good of their promises to destroy Israel. I personally do not see any other practical option for Israeli reaction to an Iranian attack but a nuclear strike massive enough to eliminate the possibility of a following Iranian counter-attack.
Should I continue to explain the consequences of a large scale nuclear war in the Middle East on the economy in the US and the rest of the world or you can use your own imagination?-
-
Neutral
Thinker226 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As I've said, Jovial, you should read something about Israel, Iran and other countries and subjects. You will be amazed to discover that Israel is a SOVEREIGN STATE and that this means, among other things, that the Israeli people and its leaders have the right to decide what is good for them, NOT do what someone else says.
Reply
By the way, I have not seen yet your declaration saying something like "If they (Palestinians) want our help then they better do what we say" and demanding to stop all kinds of aid to the Palestinians for as long as they are not in full compliance. Does it mean that the Palestinians actually DO what you say or, alternatively, that you treat Palestinians differently from Jews?-
Neutral
jovial6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Then if they are A SOVREIGN STATE let them take care of their own problems no matter how formidable they may seem. We do it. It seems that the only time Israel likes to invade or attack other people is when they know for a fact they have overwhelming military superiortiy. Let's see if the warmongerers in your cabinet have the stomach to fight a real war.
Reply-
Neutral
Thinker226 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
> Then if they are A SOVREIGN STATE let them take care of their own problems...
Reply
Israel always took care of their own problems, Jovial. It will do it again if necessary even if Iranian leaders will decide to attack it. I've already explained how Israel will, possibly, do it considering the size of Iran, the distance between Israel and Iran, the Arab countries in-between and the need to assure that Iran will not be capable to launch a counter-attack against Israel in the future. I've also explained that such Israeli actions will inevitably result in catastroplic consequences for the world economy making it of utmost importance for the US and other Western countries to prevent Iran from attacking Israel... but you've, apparently, ignored my explanations. It's a pity as ignorance never makes you smarter.
> It seems that the only time Israel likes to invade or attack other people is when they know for a fact they have overwhelming military superiortiy.
No, Jovial. Israel NEVER attacked other people without a provocation. It ALWAYS responded to an attack or an act of aggression by a militarily weaker enemies (PLO or Hezbollah based in Lebanon) or by militarily stronger ones (Lebanon, Syria, Transjordan, Iraq and Egypt in 1948; Egypt, Syria and Jordan in 1967; Egypt and Syria in 1973)... and I can assure you that in every case it was a real war.-
Neutral
jovial6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I could care less about the history/logistics lesson. If Israel wants our help they should seriously consider what our President is saying. To thumb their nose at us and try to run counter to our policies as we try to help them is not productive.
Reply-
Neutral
Thinker226 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
> I could care less about the history/logistics lesson.
Reply
I doubt it. Caring LESS about history lessons is hardly possible for someone who does not care about these lessons at all, Jovial.
> If Israel wants our help they should seriously consider what our President is saying.
I can assure you that the Israeli government takes the President's sayings VERY seriously. This being said, however, it does not mean that it will always comply with these sayings nor does the US law require such full compliance with the President's sayings as a condition of the US aid to Israel.
to put in simpler terms Israeli government' job is to care about ISRAELI interests just as the job of American government is to care about American interests. As long as aid to Israel is being seen to be in American interests this aid will continue do you like it or not.-
-
Neutral
Thinker226 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
> I care about history..just not your twisted interpretation of it.
Reply
You do? In this case you should have no troubles offering an anternative interpretation correlating with documented facts and common sense. Good luck, Jovial!
> Well the US law should require full compliance. That is a major part of the problem.
If you believe that the US laws that do not require full compliance are "a major part of the problem" you should move to a place where such compliance is already achieved.-
-
Neutral
Thinker226 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Good luck, Jovial! Don't forget to offer your alternative interpretation of history correlating with documented facts and common sense, however.
Reply
In this case, you've forgotten to include such alternative interpretation, unfortunately. You've also forgotten to include a couple of examples of my "name calling" you've complained about and in general, you did not include ANY examples of ANY bad things I've, apparently, committed.
Keep the good work, Jovial!
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
Dionys6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I do have some troubles with suggestions to let Iranian leaders to continue their nuclear program and then use the weapons obtained as a result against other states."
Reply
More "the x's have nuclear weapons!!!!!!!" scare tactics. Don't you ever learn?-
0%
Thinker226 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I've learned long enough to know that two and two is four, Dionis. I've also learned long anough to know that if someone is threatening to kill you it's wise to believe him especially if he is spending a lot of money on weapons... like the Iranian leaders are doing.
Reply
Nevertheless you're welcome to PROVE me wrong, Dionys... if you can.-
100%
jovial6 months, 2 weeks ago
-
0%
Thinker226 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
> That's your tactic to throw up some conspiracy that's semi-plausible...
Reply
It's interesting that you refer to multiple and VERY public threats to destroy Israel made by Iranian President Ahmadinejad, the Supreme Leader of Iran Ayatollah Khamenei and other political, religious and military Iranian leaders as "some conspiracy that's semi-plausible".
> The problem is you can't prove it right either.
I CAN. To prove the Iranian threats I can show hundreds of links to relevant declarations of Iranian leaders.
To prove me wrong, however, Dionys (or YOU) will have to show that Iranian leaders somehow conspired with the Zionists against their own people to create an impression of aggressive threatening Iran while in reality Iran is a peaceful, friendly and loving democracy. Somehow I doubt that either of you will even try to tackle this difficult task.-
100%
jovial6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
A declaration isn't proof. How many times has the U.S. been threatened by that nut from N. Korea. It's all blowhard. LIke I said before, it's Israel's problem. They wanted us to butt out of their politics. So let us butt out. You guys should be on your own. maybe your country should start giving us money instead of vica-versa. Tired of Iran's threatening, let Israel ATTACK THEM!.
Reply-
-
-
Neutral
Thinker226 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
They (Iranians) already have the gun (hundreds of nuclear-capable missiles with range of 2000 to 3000 kilometers). They're busy working on loading this gun (the Iranian nuclear program).
Reply
This means that you DON'T KNOW what their gun is loaded with but you believe that it's loaded with blanks and you "wouldn't sweat it" until the bullet hits you proving you were mistaken. Somehow I do not believe that this is what you would do if someone was pointing a gun at you yelling that he was going to kill you.
You believe that Iranian leaders are morons spending billions on missiles which are practically unusable without warheads. Alternatively, you believe that Israelis are morons supposed to buy this tale.-
-
Neutral
Thinker226 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As I've already explained you better believe to someone who is pointing a gun at you yelling that he is going to kill you.
Reply
Regarding "Iran KNOWS for a fact" you may recall that in November, 1941 Japan KNEW for a fact as well. Nevertheless, in December, 1941 it attacked the US in Pearl Harbor.
I do not have any reasons to beleive that the Iranian leaders are liars and bluffers. If you beleive that YOU know better than the Supreme Leader of Iran Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and the President of Iran Mahmoud Ahmadinejad what Iranian plans and intentions are be my guest and share this information with us.
Don't forget to explain the benefits Iran is gaining from "bluffing" about its intentions to destroy Israel. In return I'll explain to you what Iran is, apparently, losing from its "bluffing" while it is playing (according to you) a "sheep in the wolf's clothes".
Good luck!-
Neutral
jovial6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Don't forget the benefits that Israel is gaining by this enhanced fear mongering. They get unfettered military aide and money. It's time to get Israel of the tit. The arrogance of you to equate the goals of Israel to our goals without considering us at all. I'm ignoring your cheerleading azz , because you sound like a stinking broken record. The same mentality over and over again without the wilingness to try something different.
Reply-
Neutral
Thinker226 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
> Don't forget the benefits that Israel is gaining by this enhanced fear mongering. They get unfettered military aide and money.
Reply
This is hardly a "benefit", Jovial. You see, American aid to Israel amounts to $3 billion a year while Israel spends on defense about $13 Billion. It seems that Israel would gladly turn down US aid and use the remaining $10 billion elsewhere in case there was no need to spend that much on defense.
> The same mentality over and over again without the wilingness to try something different.
As I've said ignorance rarely makes you smarter. If you don't like the mentality of trusting those threatening to kill you and fighting back when attacked why don't you offer a BETTER alternative instead of ignoring the only (at least for now) option available?-
Neutral
jovial6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Ignorance is running into a wall again and again like you are. Your name calling proves you can't dispute my facts. Israel needs to fight their own battles. For a couple of countries that are so small in land mass and population. Israel and the Palestinians- have directly or indirectly been the cause of more grief and trouble than frankly they're worth. Take your 10 billion and see ya! BTW, 3 billion is over 20% of your defense budget. So you and your country's arrogance shines again. I say cutoff all aid, and let you guys do whatever you like. I'm sure one day your common sense will get the better of your arrogance.
Reply-
Neutral
Thinker226 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
> Ignorance is running into a wall...
Reply
I'm not running into a wall, Jovial. To the contrary, I'm always offering clear as well as factually, logically and documantally supported statements.
> Your name calling proves...
The only name I've use referring to you was 'Jovial' but it was the name you've chosen for yourself, Jovial.
> I say cutoff all aid, and let you guys do whatever you like.
Well, you may say whatever you want, of course. If and when your sayings will mean something come back and I'll gladly continue this conversation. -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
43%
Endoscopy6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
When is it meddling to call a spade a spade. Obama's refusal to acknowledge the wrong done there is tantamount to endorsing it. The President of France gave a speech denouncing what happened and that is not meddling. Obama is to be found wanting.
Reply -
-
-
-
61%
Commodore16 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I don't agree w/Obama bin Laden on much but this time I must. If a democratic revolution occurs in Iran w/no outside interference then it will be truly genuine and respected. And if Iran wants our guidance or input or any assistance at all then they can ask. I believe if the politicians had been doing this all along then the number of our problems would have been considerably less. If we fix our internal problems first then we can help the rest of the world. If they want it.
Reply-
-
-
-
60%
BB646 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Then you clearly have no idea why France supported us. Freedom was not a good thing for any monarch, however supporting the Colonies, helped the French king in his fight with England. I suspect if given a real chance, France would have tried taking the colonies after the revolution. Again, it was to keep the UK off balance not because of loving freedom or dumping a monarch.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
80%
NoWayMan6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
glad that you agree with Obama, but you do know that Iran has been holding democratic elections for some time now, right? so, there won't be any "democratic revolution" happening in iran soon. it already happened.
Reply
this is about making those democratic elections legit, and we're ones to talk since we have some problems in that area as well, with electronic voting machines that for some unknown reason aren't able to create a paper trail.
-
-
82%
Charlson6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
America is not the police of the world nor are we arbitrators of democracy. Regardless the outcome of Iran's election, it's their country and their system of government. The Republicans, as usual, have put all their rotten eggs in one basket. The basket of giving overt support to the opposition which would insure that the attention would turn away from Iran's internal problems and focus on the "Great Satan" once again.
Reply-
40%
BB646 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
We are not supposed to be the world police force but we've taken that roll on after the fall of the British and French Empires. When they lost their colonies, they didn't need the large armies and navies to maintain control. That's where we came in. Large military, freedom loving nation that we are, we police the world.
Reply
As for Iran, they are a pretty good size threat in that region. If we would have to take them out we have the pinned from three sides. We're boosting troops in Afghanistan and have around 145K in Iraq. With our Navy holding the Gulf, it would be a rather short one sided fight. Iran would be similar to Iraq but without the arms being smuggled in from a neighbor.
I think we should help the protesters in any way short of actual invasion.-
50%
Thinker226 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
> With our Navy holding the Gulf, it would be a rather short one sided fight. Iran would be similar to Iraq but without the arms being smuggled in from a neighbor.
Reply
I beg to differ. Iran is a large country with a difficult terrain and some 66 Million strong population educated in the culture of the glory to die for Islam. Recent wars with Islamic countries proved that these wars are differrent from traditional wars against traditional militaries. The Iran-Iraq war, the civil war in Lebanon, the wars of Israel against Arab countries, the wars of US in Iraq and Afghanistan had proven again and again that eliminating their traditional military power can be achieved fairly quickly only to result in the unwinnable conflict with millions of hostile violent and in many cases fanatic civilians. The US is mired in Iraq and Afghanistan with no obvious way to get out while NOT losing the war. The same will inevitably happen in Iran as well in case the West will not be able to convince Iranian leaders to give up their plans of obtaining nuclear weapons and destruction of Israel.
-
-
-
90%
slate6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
We shouldn't interfere in this, but should watch and see what happens. The educated young will eventually enact change for the better, though it most likely will turn bloody.
Reply
If indeed it does turn very bloody, should we just sit by and watch or then help?-
100%
Tangent0016 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"If indeed it does turn very bloody, should we just sit by and watch or then help?"
Reply
That is the question, isn't it. Do we take part in a civil war? How would that affect the legitimacy of whatever government emerges? What would be the 'price' for US assistance?
Whatever aid occurs, I think it should be under the auspices of the UN. Yes, I know the UN has problems, but if the US intervenes unilaterally, it will smack of advancing American hegemony in the region and ultimately further polarize the Middle East.
I think a dialog with Iranians living in the US and allied countries would be a good start. Let's find out how the opposition movement would like to world to help. I'm pretty sure the last thing Iranians want is another Iraq-style 'nation-building' exercise. I'm pretty sure that's the last thing Americans want as well.
-
-
0%
Daylight6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Ali Khamainy has said the Western Zionist world wanted the people in Iran to vote in a very lower numbers, so that they could meddle in the affairs of Iran but the turn out was 40 millions and the Zionists were shocked and they wanted to create some kind of suspicion in the minds of the Iranian people that the election was rigged but even the 5 year old will know it is not easy to manipulate 11 million votes in favor of the incumbent president. Media campaign to attack Iran is not a new thing the Zionists are doing it all along and they are paranoid, they want a war with Iran but the Americans were not interested, so the Zionist use different tactics to create a kind of suspicion that the Iranian government is a cheat and the people are looking for freedom. But the Iranian people don't give a damn about the corrupt Western democracy but all they are looking for is different people whom they consider to be their better choice of candidates that they will serve them better. The Western media have been saying for years that the Iranians are looking for change of regime but its not true but the media make people to believe that Iran is in real problem so people are angry at their government. This is ridiculous, this is the same media mislead the American people of Iraq WMD and finally America invaded Iraq and Afghanistan and got itself bankrupted in the name of the chosen people who are illegally occupying the land of the Palestinians. Zionist will never learn, they are a failure and they are failing the American regime as well, by the time the Americans realize this, it will be too late. If America is looking for respect and leadership in the world, it should live by example and reign in Israel to comply United Nation resolutions and treaties and also international laws but it is the other way around. A so called supper power is controlled and manipulated by the Zionist thugs who are occupying the land of the Palestinians for the last 60 years and continuing the settlements and destruction of Palestinian homes.
Reply-
-
50%
BB646 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Wow, daylight I haven't seen you here recently. I was hoping Massod got you already....
Reply
The elections were a fraud. Like most Islamic run programs claiming to be fair and balanced, it's a load. There is no such thing as a free honest election when your side is in power.
There were chemical, biological and special operations weapons found in Iraq. He used them against Iran and the Kurds. I still suspect there may have been nuclear items there. Perhaps not a full nuclear bomb but certainly the makings of a dirty bomb. Perhaps you could answer this. What did Mossad destroy last summer in Syria. It was clearly a "hot" item, the area is still closed. Did this come from Iraq, Iran or North Korea? Was this the reason Saddam's family is under the protection of the Syrian secret police? Was the the payment for their protection?
As to never learn, wouldn't that be the ignorance Muslims? For over 60 years you've been fighting Israel and all you seem to do is make good cannon fodder. You suck as fighter pilots, tank commanders and even your infantry stinks. How can you suck at infantry work? The only type of training you excel at are car bombers attacking woman and children. Well that's not true, they have to be unarmed woman and children.
Bust seriously, until you start loving your children more than you love killing Jews, you're never going to live up to the civilizations that came before you. The middle east was a jewel of civilization. What the hell happened to you guys?
-
-
80%
GWHayduke6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I find it odd, that when considering countries other than our own, we often take diametrically opposite points of view toward the 'change' or lack thereof in those countries than we do our own.
Reply
You hear 'conservatives' claiming that these radical countries who have been ruled by some form of strict religious governance, need to 'progress' or 'change' to become more modern or Westernized.
Then, on the other hand, we have 'liberals' claiming that meddling in the affairs of countries / governments that have been in existence for centuries longer than our republican democracy should be forbidden for, well, the sake of conservation.
Not that I disagree with either point of view, nor do believe that these are absolutes, I just think it is interesting that groups could want one thing for their home country and the exact opposite for foreign countries.
Do as we say, not as we do, I guess. -
67%
lloydm656 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Charlson,your absolutely right,but we are still the worlds last best hope.I don,t expect the president to takes sides in Iran.I hope the people of this still great America don't succumb to the same notion,of you,mesodude,and too many people on propeller. Instead we should hope,and pray for an overthrow of the regime of Iran.
Reply -
-
33%
Thinker226 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"He" (whoever "he" is) did and will be 'meddling' for as long as "he" is alive because "his" very existence means 'meddling' to those complaining about it... just as the very existence of Israel means a lot of bad things to "daylight" and other Jew-haters.
Reply -
100%
Natureboy6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"So he will not be meddling - does that mean that he has been meddling?"
Reply
The US has been meddling, that is sure. Congress budgeted $75 million in 2008 to finance "regime change" in Iran. $20 million plus was spent on propaganda efforts through VOA etc and the rest channeled to parties within Iran. Our government will not say to whom. But have you seen all of the signs held by Mousavi supporters, professionally printed, color coordinated, and IN ENGLISH? That's not what a grassroots uprising looks like, but that is what a well-financed astroturf movement looks like.
So maybe Obama was semantically correct in saying we WILL not interfere, because that is not the same as saying that we have not ALREADY interfered.-
50%
Thinker226 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
> Congress budgeted $75 million in 2008 to finance "regime change" in Iran. $20 million plus was spent on propaganda efforts through VOA etc and the rest channeled to parties within Iran.
Reply
Congress also budgeted money to Gaza. Do you consider it 'meddling' in Palestinian affairs and if so do you have a problem with it?
> ...have you seen all of the signs held by Mousavi supporters, professionally printed, color coordinated, and IN ENGLISH?
Oh yes... I have a secret to share with you, Natureboy: These signs in most cases are being made for reporters who will, hopefully, make their content available to the rest of the world. Alas, not everyone is fluent in Farsi on this planet.-
100%
Ratskii6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
And I seem to remember signs in English protesting American support for the Shah during the uprising in Iran during the 70s. Yes, people in Iran are well educated, many know more than one language, and they are aware of world opinion. Is that a surprise, Nature Boy?
Reply
-
-
-
-
20%
automan9096 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
He is already meddling by not giving any support for these people that only want a fair election and to be free.
Reply
The protester's signs are in English.
They are asking for some sort of support.
Even just verbal support.
Obama has no problem supporting terrorists and America haters like Ayres, Wright, Hammas, Chavez, and Castro.
To say nothing says everything.
Obama is a coward and the whole world knows it.-
83%
crespi6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Roboheart666 and all you other Neocons-
Reply
You ultra-Conservatives have been DEAD wrong about Middle East actions all along the line.
First you (Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld etc.) attack the Taliban AND AlQaida as one entity in Afghanistan. AlQaida merely flees to Pakistan. Then you shoved the Iraq "war" down our throats saying we would be "greeted as liberators" when that was not only not true, but resulted in more violence and deaths that had even occurred under HUSSEIN!. Then THIS allowed the Taliban to reclaim most of Afghanistan.
Meanwhile Rush Limbaugh and John McCain are singing "Bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran" and FoxNews is openly promoting the PREEMPTIVE NUCLEAR BOMBING of innocent Iranian women and children for years.
Why, to start World War Three like Palin and the Armageddonists pray for? Or to rip off the American people and government with more no-bid contracts to international arms dealers who sell to both sides? Is GREED your motivation?
Considering your track record why don't you just let people obviously smarter and better informed handle this and keep your "peanut gallery of hate" shut the hell up. -
-
-
67%
supermat16 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
During our war of liberation from tyranny,the revolutionary war, we had outside help. They waited until they thought we could pull it off, but the French came to our aid with materials and finally with their Army and Navy. Geesh, sure am glad they meddled in our affairs.
Reply
The election in Iran was neither fair nor democratic. That's the problem.-
67%
Natureboy6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"The election in Iran was neither fair nor democratic."
Reply
Those who say so have nothing real to point at except the speed of the vote count, which was arguably due to Iran's computerized vote-counting system.
Ahmadinejad won by roughly the margin that indepenent polls predicted, and by roughly the same margin he won by in 2005.
Want to see fixed elections? Revisit the shenanigans in the USA in 2000 and 2004. Who came to our aid then? And where was your outrage?-
-
100%
Natureboy6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I believe they were. But paper ballots can be counted electronically through scanning and other methods. And Iran had implemented an electronic system.
Reply
Even the AP article alleging that the speed of the count was "suspicious" had this buried gem -
"A new computerized system might have helped speed the process in urban centers, where most Iranians live, though it is unclear if that system was extended to every small town and village."
In other words, the speed of the vote count may be entirelu UNsuspicious, depending on how widespread their computerized balloting system is and exactly how it works. I could find no such details in any of the articles alleging suspicious speed.
To place the issue of speed in context, there were over 120 million votes cast in the last US presidential election. The networks all declared Obama to be the winner by 11 p.m. that day, which was exactly when the polls closed in Alaska, California, Oregon, Washington and Idaho, and two hours BEFORE the polls closed in Hawaii. Now, if I omitted the names "Iran" and "USA" from these two scenarios and just presented them to you as two major elections, which scenario would you believe was more suspect? Counting 40 million votes in 12 hours or counting 120 million votes AND naming the winner before all the polls had even closed?-
100%
Ratskii6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There is another aspect that you don't seem to be seeing. That is that the regime won't allow any independent parties to view the ballots.
Reply
In addition to that, don't you consider it suspicious that all areas of the country showed almost exactly the same difference between Ahmadenejad's votes and Mousavi's?
None the less it is up to the people of Iran, and nothing you can say is going to stop them.-
Neutral
Natureboy6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What I call suspicious is the business of straining at gnats and swallowing camels. Do some googling and you will find that the "same difference" issue which you cite has to do with the way the data was cumulatively aggregated. Properly broken down, it dislpays the irregularities which you hanker to see.
Reply
Want to see vote fraud? I can show you the evidence of voter disenfranchisement in Florida and New Mexico, very real stuff. Want to get Iranian about it? Beat up cops and set fires in the streets? Of course not. You will just cheerlead when it happens in some other country.-
Neutral
Ratskii6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'm quite aware of the voter disenfranchisement in Florida in 2000. I have been doing some research on independent sources on this issue.
Reply
I've been in demonstrations and seen police riots that you probably can't begin to imagine. I strongly suspect (since you are using much of the same kind of rhetoric that Endo, Auto, Klarissa, Thinker, et al use) that you have a hidden agenda here. I'd be fascinated to know what it is.
By the way, it was the cops and militias beating up the Iranian demonstrators (with a few instances of the demonstrators fighting back). I've been in enough demonstrations and been called enough names by the people in power to know when someone (you) doesn't have a clue.-
Neutral
Natureboy6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I've been in demonstrations and seen police riots that you probably can't begin to imagine."
Reply
Good for you. I also am a veteran of the anti-war movement and have seen police riots first-hand.
"I strongly suspect (since you are using much of the same kind of rhetoric that Endo, Auto, Klarissa, Thinker, et al use) that you have a hidden agenda here. I'd be fascinated to know what it is."
I am anti-koolaid.
Thanks for asking. -
Neutral
Natureboy6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I've been in enough demonstrations and been called enough names by the people in power to know when someone (you) doesn't have a clue."
Reply
Wouldn't it be cool if marching around with a picket sign actually bestowed some sort of insight or wisdom?
Unfortunately, it doesn't.
If it did, you probably wouldn't let a propaganda blitz stampede you into cheerleading for "regime change" in Iran or for that matter anywhere except in your OWN country. It is purely American exceptionalism to think that you should have a say in how other people in other countries govern themselves.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
Ratskii6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There are several other things to point at. One is that the percentage of Ahmadenejad's lead never varied, regardless of what areas the votes were coming in from. A second is that Ahmadenejad insulted Mousavi's wife in the debate, something that Iranians find extremely objectionable. The third is that all the polls after the initial one (which was taken before the beginning of campaigning) showed Mousavi gaining and finally leading Ahmadenjad. The fourth is that they won't let independent sources look at the ballots. Finally, and most importantly, the Iranians themselves don't believe it.
Reply
Iranians have one of the best educated populations in the Middle East. Given the past meddling in their country by outside powers, I don't think they would be so easily manipulated.
-
-
-
-
-
-
33%
ranrod6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
skyynyte...Every time the US does something to another country. We create another monster. We have someone who can think in office. This mistake won't be made, intentionally, for the next 3 years at least.....your asswipe in chief is the monster Yea he can think ,of ways to grab more power .He siezes control of private businesses, he's increased the national debt more in 4 months than Bush did in 8 years,he's illegally fired IG for investgating his cronie going against law he himself voted for, his attempt to sieze healthcare at an additional cost of trillions his plan would cost $65,000 for each person previously uninsured added to the system . All you Obama lovers can just kiss my ass !
Reply -
20%
ranrod6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
skyynyte...Every time the US does something to another country. We create another monster. We have someone who can think in office. This mistake won't be made, intentionally, for the next 3 years at least.....your asswipe in chief is the monster Yea he can think ,of ways to grab more power .He siezes control of private businesses, he's increased the national debt more in 4 months than Bush did in 8 years,he's illegally fired IG for investgating his cronie going against law he himself voted for, his attempt to sieze healthcare at an additional cost of trillions his plan would cost $65,000 for each person previously uninsured added to the system . All you Obama lovers can just kiss my ass !
Reply
-
-
-
25%
supermat16 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hey natureboy! There is already evidence of voter fraud in Iran. Independent sources in Iran say that there are areas where there are far too many vote than there are voters.
Reply
To compare our election issues, that were settled in court, with Irans shows your extreme contempt for the country you live in. Many independent news sources, many left leaning, sponsered recounts and analysis of the Florida recount all came to the same conclusion. Bush won. The 2004 results don't even rate a comment. No one but a partisan freak disputes the outcome. -
-
-
100%
GehlLady6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I have to agree with the Presidents' public stance, and if that is all there is to our involvement I'd rather see him err on the side of caution, if at all. I do wonder if we have people on the inside, undercover, so to speak.......
Reply -
0%
calitennflo6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninth_Amendment_to_th...
Reply
Now Oboma wants to read the constitution's 9th amendment...and in the month they used to celebrate the Constitution and men liken James Madison. -
100%
jerrywijaya6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Just want to say that you have a great article.. You have a big point..
Reply
Regards,
Rusli Zainal Sang Visioner -
-
0%
Icantwait6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My Fellow Americans: Remember Obama and Ahmadinejad are buds. Obama has no intention of interfering because he wants Ahmadinejad, his pal to be in Power. Do you think they're secret talks were about Michelles garden? Obama says he will not interfere in order to look good in the Obama Media Meddlers News Pages. The Pay For Hire Media will print this in bold type to give the American people the impression that Obama really wanted the opposition to win but won't interfere even though the opposition did not win. In Fact he did not want the Opposition to win he wanted Ahmadinejad to win. Got it?
Reply
He is tricky, sitting on the stoop, thinking up new ways to completely Devastate the Poor, Frustrate the Rich, and Bankrupt the Middle Classes Economic Engine.
However, Obama is a Coward, just as Hitler was a Coward, Stalin was a Coward, Chavez is a Coward, Ahmadinejad is a Coward, and as is the list of Power Hungry Despots.
The Government Press will tell you he is a regular Dirty Harry after viewing him, Making His Day, by killing a helpless fly. Well, I guess he will hurt a fly. I'm sure Michelle got wind of that assassination and will make him sleep on the Couch, for a couple of nights, for embarrassing her family sharecroppers.
The Real American -
100%
politicalpost6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
When President Obama spoke in Cairo his speech resonated to over one billion people mostly people of Muslim faith. The most important part of his speech with regard to Iran was an apology to Iran for overthrowing by us their legitimate leader Mosaddeq in 1953. The chain of events thereafter of installing dictator Phallavi Shah ( mind you -he had worse record than Saddam, when hundreds of thousands Iranians died under Savak ) and his overthrow by Ayatollah Khomeini with help of revolutionary people like the Ahmadinajad and Mousavi, has led to current to theocratic form of government. So, Presiident Obama was very courageous and absolutely right to apolozise to them for causing havoc to their country since 1953. The protest by Iranian people after this elections is not about which candidate won but more about freedom from theocratic form of government. President Obama has shown a very sound judgement by not interfering into Iranian affairs that Neocon spin machine want him to do. President Obama also mentions that both the candidates have the same background. In fact, Mousavi was the Prime Minister under Ayatollah Khomeini who did US hostages exchange for arms under Reagan / Bush administration with Isreal as brokering the deal what was called Iran-Contra scandal- see Walsh Report. Again, that was Neocon meddling into Iran.
Reply
Suddendly, Neocons are having sympathy for Iran and not long ago McCain sang a song Bomb..Bomb ..Bomb .. a Iran.
President Obama has shown an excellent judgement of not to interfere in their affairs and on contrast President Bush's neocon cabal did that in Iraq and what mess he has set. -
100%
cspezial6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
A prime opportunity to destabilize one of the most hostile regimes in the world, and many posting on here want to do nothing? What should we do, then? Shall we wait for them to attack their neighbors? Shall we wait for them to attack us? My thought would be to use this opportunity to bring down their leadership, as well as bring hope to millions of Iranians. I would not send troops in directly, because they need to do this on their own, but I do feel that we should support them financially, provide weapons, etc. I know America is no longer a beacon of hope in the world, and we don't mean much to anyone anymore, especially to ourselves, but I think that it is a basic human responsibility to at least attempt to help other humans live free, nationality notwithstanding.
Reply -
-
Neutral
Albmore6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The fatct of the matter is it lies in the hand of the people of Iran. They and the entire world knows how Iran is seen world wide with their current leadership. They know they may be or the be short of a war because of their nuke ambitions.
Reply
Another instable country in this region is not 100% a good thing as we see what is happening in Iraq and Afgan..
Should we be on full alert? YES as I think we and the rest of the world is. We SHOULD show our support for change in Iran. I think one of the best ways is to show without doubt we will not except a nucleur Iran. I think also it is in the best interest of the neighboring countries in that area that they show their support for change.-
Neutral
Thinker226 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
> The fatct of the matter is it lies in the hand of the people of Iran.
Reply
Very true.
> They and the entire world knows how Iran is seen world wide with their current leadership.
This is also true as is true that the vast majority of Iranians care about it much less than the majority of Americans care how the US is being seen by Sri Lanka.
> They know they may be or the be short of a war because of their nuke ambitions.
This is true as well as is true that they're Shia Muslims looking forward for the opportunity to die for the glory of Allah. You may recall thousands of Iranian children sent to clear mine fields with their bodies during Iran-Iraq war and the plastic Taiwan-made keys to Paradise each of them carried. You may also recall recent declaration of one Iranian leader saying that Iran would be willling to sacrifice half of its population in a war with Israel.
> We SHOULD show our support for change in Iran.
WHAT change? Do you believe that the other guy would be any different from Ahmadinejad?
> I think one of the best ways is to show without doubt we will not except a nucleur Iran.
Well, and what will "we" do in case Iran will test a nuclear device tomorrow announcing that it IS nuclear? What did "we" do with nuclear North Korea or uclear Pakistan?
-
-
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.