Iran (cue singing of 'Tehran is On Fire' to tune of Sex On Fire)

[Shan'do Spike]

Right, so. For those of you who are new to this, the reformist candidate in the Iranian elections, Mr Mousavi, lost in the election. This has sent Iran into a kind of spree which really does resemble the fervour of their last revolution. I can't really say I blame them.

Since it's been aluded to in this thread but never actually stated: the alledged reason for the protests isn't simply because they lost the election. Rather, there have been very serious allegations of election fraud. Pre-vote polls suggested that Mousavi had a lead of about 20% in the polls (meaning that the polling numbers suggested a 60-40 victory for Mousavi). However, the results of the election were almost a polar opposite of the original polls. In addition, Mousavi didn't even win most of his strongholds of power: it was assumed that he would carry a large advantage in Tehran, which he lost. He didn't even win his own home town. Furthermore, this was an election where a vast majority of the ballots were paper ballots, yet the results were announced merely an hour after the polls closed. It seems very unlikely that an accurate count could have taken place in that time, even if they were doing some counting as the ballots came in. The protests are less because they lost the election and much more because they feel that the results of the election were tampered with. The Supreme Council is ostensibly recounting the votes, but they back Ahmadinejad, so I would be shocked if most of the protesters accepted anything they say.


And for people who are trying to compare this potential election fraud to the alleged fraud in 2000 in America, you've got nothing to stand on. The margin of victory in Florida was so close that any reasonable confidence interval to identify the "true" percentage of the vote is going to include percentages that would have given a win to either Bush or Gore. And anyone who thinks that both Republicans and Democrats in Florida weren't doing anything they could to influence that election are naive. I'm sure they both were doing anything they could.

(And for reference, since I'm sure people will be trying to ascertain where I stand politically from this post, I'm a libertarian. Take what you will from there.)

[Walter Sobchak]

In my initial post, I included Rafsanjani on my list of people that should be executed. Now, it seems that Rafsanjani may be poised to join Mousavi and the protesters, both because of his rivalry with Khamenei as well as his desire to become more powerful.

The Iranian regime is done. They may stop the protests, but the animosity cannot be reversed. Factor in possible covert aid by either the United States or the European Union and the cards are stacked against the Ayatollah.

[Zargabaath]

I think there should be a strong response condeming the actions taken by the government of Iran by trying to creat a blackout in a supposed Republic.

To me this is nothing important, if Mousavi becomes the president it doesn't change Iran. All Mousavi would be is a figure head the real power lies in the clergy, ultimately in the Ayatollah. If the Ayatollah is not changed then these demonstrations don't change much. It would be like placing a new Queen or King in England or Emperor in Japan, they have no power.

Iran should be kicked out of the U.N. A country that is suppresing its people from protesting and a media shutdown is not what the U.N "stands" for. Of course what am I thinking, the U.N is the perfect place for Iran; the U.N allowed the Soviet Union, China, Iraq, North Korea, and African countries committing genocide, child slavery, and female mutilation/circumcision. The U.N is a safe haven for countries like Iran against those who would oppose them.

Take a look at the U.N's handling of North Korea... There is a ship that has long been suspected of breaking U.N sanctions of transporting banned materials, so what does the newly passed U.N resolution say about bording ships that may have contraband... The "inspectors" have to ASK if they can come onboard, do you see the teeth in that resolution, the HARD stance they have on rogue countries that don't follow them. And U.N forces in Africa that are trying to stop the civil war or genocide going on... what are they doing? Sitting around. There are probably more reports of U.N soldiers raping civilians in African then the amount of kills the soldiers got *SARCASM*. But they don't fight, the U.N is the League of Nation, a organization that has no real power, does nothing to enforce their resolutions, a safe haven for countries that violate what it "stands" for and is only relevant due to the support from the liberal wolrd.

The U.N