Iran

[Glaucus]

Iran hardliners set for landslide (http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/02/22/iran.elections/index.html)

TEHRAN, Iran -- Hardline conservatives opposed to reform are heading for a landslide victory in Iran's controversial parliamentary elections.

....

"The loser of this election is the United States, Zionism and enemies of the Iranian nation," he told state media, The Associated Press reported.

If the recent changes in Lybia has been credited to the US invasion of Iraq, then should we then not also blame it for the return of the conservatives in Iran? I think so. Although the elections were boycotted by the "reformists" (aka liberals) in protest of recent conservative dirty tricks, the conservatives have managed to get a fair number of votes cast in their favor.

I think the situation is Iran is fairly tense right now, and it's a powder keg waiting to go off. Could we see another revolution in the streets of Tehran? (http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/DEB1ED55-7F0A-4D40-A358-E94067A76075.htm) If we do, that means that there is a fair bit of resistance to those damn conservatives, but if we don't then it tells us that many Iranians support the anti-American hard-liners. Of course, a revolution in Iran could have dire consequences in Iraq as well. Iran will be the country to watch in the next few days and weeks, and can act as a weather vein for the war on terror and the on-going occupation of Iraq.

- Mike

[bloodline]

If the recent changes in Lybia has been credited to the US invasion of Iraq, then should we then not also blame it for the return of the conservatives in Iran? I think so


If you think that, then maybe you should actually talk to an Iranian person.

There is a massive divide bettween the the young and the old.

[Fade]

Come on Glaucus, you're starting to sound like KennyR, with his, everything bad that happens, anywhere in the world, is somehow the fault of the US.

Keep preaching that kind of rhetoric and there will be no one left in the US who cares what other countries think.

[KennyR]

Hardline conservatism isn't the fault of the US. It was always there in Iran (although US support of the Shah in the 80s did nothing but strengthen it). But what conservatives love is something to be really strongly anti against. It takes people's attention from the fact that conservative policies don't, by their nature, solve any of society's problems. The US attacking Iraq has given these hardliners more sympathy than anything else could have and swayed weakly reformist or undecided voters.

So I would say, that in summary, the USA is fully to blame for the rise to power of hardline Islamist elements in Iran. Without a doubt.

Keep preaching that kind of rhetoric and there will be no one left in the US who cares what other countries think.

You mean there are some still left now? :)

[bloodline]

So I would say, that in summary, the USA is fully to blame for the rise to power of hardline Islamist elements in Iran. Without a doubt.


You have got to stop this random speculation!!! Just talk to a REAL IRANIAN person.

[Glaucus]

bloodline wrote:
If you think that, then maybe you should actually talk to an Iranian person.

There is a massive divide bettween the the young and the old.Correct, there is, but who has the power? It's also true that in Tehran voter turn out was around 30%, which also tells us something. However, in other parts of Iran voter turn out was higher. Let's not forget that in the last elections voter turn out was, on average, around 60%. So yes, there are clear signs of divide here, as there are clear signs that the Iranian conservative hard-liners have cheated their way into power (by banning moderates from running in the elections in the first place).

But my question is, is there a link between what happened in Iraq and what is happening in Iran? It's worth mentioning that the US has declared the at-the-time moderate Iran an Axis Of Evil, and invaded two of it's neighbours - one of which (Iraq) for reasons which have turned out to be far more suspecious then originally believed. Would these two actions not deepen the divide between the moderates and the hard-liners? Most certainly. With the Western liberalism and American militarism encrouching even closer on Iran's border's, would the hard-liners not resort to desperate measures to "conserve" their way of life? Of course they would, and that's exactly what they did. Conservatives the world over always exploit the national defense issue, it's their trump card - and we're clearly seeing it in Iran right now. One must wonder, if Iran wasn't under direct American threat, would the hard-liners have had the leverage they needed to do what they did to get into power? I think not.

- Mike

[bloodline]

You hit the nail on the head with the hardliners beating down the moderates. This is a clasic Young against the old battle... saddly the Old have all the power.

[Tigger]

KennyR wrote:

It was always there in Iran (although US support of the Shah in the 80s did nothing but strengthen it).

So I would say, that in summary, the USA is fully to blame for the rise to power of hardline Islamist elements in Iran. Without a doubt.


Given the Shah left power in 79 and was dead by July of 1980, I think all will have to agree that your mythical US support of the Shah in the 80s didnt happen. In addition, most Iranians don't blame the US for there troubles, if they blame a country of the West, (which most don't) its France not the US that is the one they are most likely to blame.
-Tig