Obama lays down harder line on Iran violence

Wednesday 24th June, 06:57 AM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

› Login to comment

Latest 15 of 206 Total Comments Show All

inkjet at 07:16 AM JST - 28th June

"He also appoints the chief judge, the chief prosecutor, special tribunals and, with the help of the chief judge, half of the 12 jurists of the Guardian Council – the powerful body that DECIDES both what bills may become law and who may RUN for president or parliament.[9]"

This is not true, regarding Iran. The leaders do NOT pick the candidates.

wikipedia is not the be all and end all but it's a start. can you show me something that would back up your position?

i remember a while back reading a popular candidate was not allowed to run for office on ideological grounds. he wasn't a pure enough islamist (is that the right term?) if candidates can be denied for this reason how can there ever be change?

of course the system is open for new blood to enter, as long as you are pure enough. and of course there have struggles within any 'party' or system. that is not the same as having an open system.

in the old soviet days people would emerge from the local ranks. they had local elections. but only communists could run. within the party there would be power struggles and policy debates. but the system was rigged to promote one ideology. it was not open. i see basically the same situation in iran.
inkjet at 07:39 AM JST - 28th June

yabits,

i reread your post without my kids pulling on my arm.

ok. the us constitution was ratified by the elected representatives of the people. was the guardian council elected by the people? was parliament who set up the islamic 'constitution' elected? or were they appointed?

ps. 'choosing from column a and column b' in america is sort of an idiom. it comes from chinese restaurants where the menus are set up that way. it means you have choices but they are pre-determined choices. i didn't mean literally two choices.
inkjet at 07:58 AM JST - 28th June

i went to the easy source again. wikipedia.

"Due to the non-elected elements brought into the constitution, and the ability of those elements to override all elected offices, the Iranian constitution does not ultimately allow for any real democratic participation beyond what is deemed appropriate by the non-elected bodies.
yabits at 08:03 AM JST - 28th June

can you show me something that would back up your position?

The book, Parliamentary Politics in Revolutionary Iran by Bahman Baktiari, is one of the primary sources for my claims.
inkjet at 08:22 AM JST - 28th June

i googled the book. here's a blurb promoting the book.

"It needs to be stressed, of course, that the Council of Guardians, a body of 12 Islamic jurors, has the right to exclude candidates from parliamentary elections on any grounds and has used this power quite widely. So one cannot speak of democracy at work, but there is nonetheless more political pluralism in evidence in Iran today than in many other Middle East countries."

faint praise indeed.

now you will continue to insist that real democratic reform, with real open elections, next door could have no influence on the iranians? it's just laughable, right?
yabits at 08:35 AM JST - 28th June

there is nonetheless more political pluralism in evidence in Iran today than in many other Middle East countries.

Looking back to the period between WWI and 1953, Iran enjoyed even greater political freedom and diversity. They didn't get that from the countries in the neighborhood.

There is no "real democratic reform" next door. The Kurds would prefer to opt out of Iraq in favor of an independent Kurdistan if they would be allowed to. In Afghanistan, things are even less democratic.

The Iranians want to evolve their system in an Iranian way. The best thing the U.S. can do is to stand clear and always extend an open hand of friendship. President Obama has executed this to near perfection.
inkjet at 08:41 AM JST - 28th June

you are useless. we're done.
smithinjapan at 01:14 PM JST - 28th June

SuperLib: "smith I really have no idea what you're trying to say. Sometimes reading your posts is like watching a dog chase his tail."

I was just pointing out your hypocrisy. Sorry if it's a bit hard for you to understand; denial is sometimes like a brick wall -- tough to get the message through. I'll say it again briefly, though: you were talking about going off topic when you're addressed and you went off topic, attacking SezWho's character rather than attempting to address his question.
inkjet at 09:09 PM JST - 28th June

from the LA times

"The Iranian president rebuked his American counterpart Saturday as the two countries fell back into a familiar pattern of back-and-forth barbs that may imperil the Obama administration's plans to open a direct dialogue with Tehran over its nuclear program."

it's funny how some here are so far gone with supporting this regime that they are stating positions which could almost be seen as condemning their hero, obama.

why can't obam let the iranians decide their own fate for crying out loud? doesn't he realize the iranians want to settle this the iranian way. my goodness what will he say when the purges start?

better get your spines ready for some extreme gymanstics guys.
Hurtado at 10:19 PM JST - 29th June

Obama is meant to lead the free world? Eh

Not that Iran will listen in any case, as the supreme leader has already confirm that Iran will chase its nuclear ambitions.

Yup, its gotta be a tough job to be the US prez right now, on one hand he doesnt want to massacre his army in a war with a very modern Iran, on the other he doesnt want to appear weak and incompentant like his predacessor.
jhk at 02:02 PM JST - 30th June

Obama hasn't really changed much from Bush, especially in the areas he said that he would change, such as main street, of which he has left California to its own devices, and millions of lower income Californians will take it up the rear.

The interesting thing is that the two things that he would do differently had the most media attention; being timid on Iran, of which he took a tougher stance (Bush would never be timid), and carbon tax (except that now it will be used to conveniently tax the world when the US is hurting, under the guise of something like the IMF or UN or something.

He's becoming kind of like Bush, except the masses are supporting him. I think in Japan he would be called O-Bush.
SebastianFlyte at 03:48 PM JST - 30th June

No point comparing Obama to Bush the brainless chimp. If I were Obama I'd just keep offering the hand of friendship and not get caught up in the war of words. Iran is pretty insignificant anyway, and there are far more pressing issues to deal with.
jhk at 05:55 PM JST - 30th June

Iran is the world's second largest oil AND natural gas resource, is a country of special geostrategic significance due to its central location in Eurasia, is home to one of the world's oldest continuous major civilizations, with historical and urban settlements dating back to 7000 BC, and is one of the only combined religious and democratic political institutions, AND one of the oldest religions in the world.

The US is just looking for any excuse to go in there that won't catch the attention of ignorant sociopaths like you. Afghanistan, then Iraq, pull out troops from Iraq today, sounds like Obama is orchestrating another heist.

He better not, because he will be the biggest betrayal mankind has ever seen.
inkjet at 08:46 PM JST - 30th June

combined religious and democratic political institutions

another apologist for the totalitarian regime. do you do free lance propaganda? what is your motivation? how many virgins did they promise?
jhk at 03:36 AM JST - 1st July

Saddam Hussein led the totalitarian regime that invaded Iran, only to be defended by the US that sided with the Totalitarian regime against Iran. The the US flipped sides later and took out Saddam Hussein. And now it is calling for a Regime change in Iran. They are looking for any excuse to do this.

And Injet, like Kissenger, is the apologist for going to war. Spineless.