The photos coming in from Iran with the country erupting over the likely theft of the presidential election are just horrifying.
What concerns me is that President Ahambreakingbad might simply decide to dispose of Mousavi and be done with it. On the other hand, how potent would Mousavi as a martyr be? In jailing or assassinating his rival, he might wind up screwing himself.
PAD
• 
When I first heard about this, I thought it would probably die down after a few rallies, but now the country seems to have erupted in rage.
.
People keep saying that the clerics rule the country and that the Iranian people will do as they are told in the Mosque, so my question is: are the clerics saying anything, or has Iran accidentally become a full-fledged republic?
.
Oh no. If democracy breaks out in Iran, does that mean it came from Iraq, ergo it came from GWB? The neocons were right? I think my brain just exploded.
Other way around, Justin. Iran had democratic elections long before we invaded Iraq.
.
The problem is that they were “managed” elections. The Supreme Leader picked who he wanted and made it look like the that person was who the people voted for.
.
Up until now that wasn’t very hard because the Supreme Leader wanted someone anti-American and a lot of the people wanted someone anti-American too. However, right now Iran has so many internal problems that they want something else. Anti-Americanism is to them what gay-marriage is to us, it stops being a wedge issue when the economy goes in the çráppër.
.
So no, nothing that the neo-cons wanted led to this. We can’t say that Obama created this either, but he’s trying really hard not to hinder it, either.
Alright, first of all, I hope the vast sarcasm of my initial post was not lost on the majority here. GWB and company are in no way responsible for the outcry for true democracy going on in Iran right now. However, that probably won’t stop said neo-cons from barking themselves up on every venue they can find to claim credit for spreading democracy in the Middle East.
.
Secondly, if you are selecting the leader and “managing” the election, it’s not really an election is it? To say that Iran had democratic elections where someone picked the leader and rigged the numbers accordingly is like saying you’re a medical doctor because you have an honorary doctorate in Physics.
.
I do agree with your observation that wedge issues mean precisely nothing when there’s something bigger on people’s radar, though.
.
As to Obama’s reaction in all this, I’ve found his treatment of Iran as a sovereign nation refreshing and respectful. I think he is wise not to throw himself in one way or another, but to wait it out and see what develops from there. Though, if he were trying to continue the previous legacy, he could always give President Ahmadinejad 48 hours to leave his own country or be invaded.
I doubt they’d kill Mousavi.
.
Right now, the youth of Iran are more pro-American than ever. With Obama at least offering them the *possibility* that there can be relations with the West, they’d like someone in power who is willing to consider that. However, the Supreme Leader doesn’t want that.
.
The problem the Supreme Leader has is maintaining the appearance of legitimacy. The reason he and the guardian council hold these elections is to make it look like their choice for “President” (thought a better term would be “spokesman”) is actually the will of the people. The massive turnout in support of an opposition to Ahmadinejad made it obvious that the election didn’t actually represent the will of the people.
.
Killing Mousavi makes it that much harder for the ruling council to make people think that the elections are legitimate. They can’t rule the country with just coercion, so they have to be careful about what their people think. It’s more likely that they’ll arrest him on charges of inciting violence, then try to get him to tell his supporters to calm down.
The whole thing has been crazy – I’ve been following the twitter feeds for a while now, and watching the way technology is affecting – and helping – those involved is awesome. Sometimes it’s a good thing that governments are so behind on tech eh?
Since I know very little about Iran (only been following since the last election really), I have no idea how this could shake down – but I naturally fear the worst. Government holds the guns…
When I hear about twitter allowing a celebrity to tell you that he just ate a bran muffin, or allowing a politician to slam another politician in the dumbest way possible, I groan and make a joke about dumb technology.
.
However, this has been a pretty good example of where twitter shines. It’s actually very good at organizing protests and getting out bits of information because it can spread small details rapidly.
.
Also, the file sharing sites have allowed protesters to upload video of things like the Republican Guard firing into the crowd. When the Iranian government takes down one site with those videos, another one pops up immediately. That’s crazy.
.
It’s weird how some of this stuff is creating a kind of ad-hoc freedom of the press in countries that don’t have it. Iran can kick our all the reporters and shut down the media, but they’re totally unprepared for every 10th protester having a video-enabled cell phone.
Have to wonder how Israel is looking at all of this. There is a clear threat by Iran’s current president. They are clearly involved in nuclear enrichment. There might be a sliver of hope that a direct confrontation can be avoided (such as a strike by Israel against Iran’s nuclear program).
.
In such a shame based culture, I don’t see the religious leaders backing down or reversing the election. So there is only one way this can play out, and it is not good. But the current unrest does perhaps delay any action against Israel. At the same time, now would not be the time for Israel to act since it would most likely just unify Iran. So this scenario is far more interesting than I would have guessed.
.
Iowa Jim
Seeing as how Mousavi also supports that nuclear program (and agrees with the Supreme Leader on quite a few other things), Israel might view this as the difference between a volcano and a forest fire. Different, but not in a way that matters.
.
I think Mousavi is less important than the movement that he rode during the election. He’s historically been pretty far into all the stuff that is problematic. Any moderation that he’s taken on has been to please the very young population of Iran that is currently quite unhappy with their government. What happens next with those people is probably more important than the actual guy who takes the title of President.
I would think Ahmadinejad (I can’t be the only one who thinks of Samir from Office Space whenever TV news anchors try to pronounce this guy’s name) isn’t dumb enough to assassinate Mousavi. Then again, I thought he wasn’t dumb enough to declare himself a landslide winner before all the votes were even counted.
I think a lot of people are shocked at how stupid Ahmadinejad and crew have been. I’m not, I still see him as the dope who got laughed at when he claimed Iran had no homosexuals.
.
It all comes down to the military. Since my plan for Iran was never followed (drop boxes of handguns and copies of feminist literature all over the country)the People have little power, other than the ability to bleed all over their oppressors. I’m guessing the Mullahs will not blanch at the prospect of having to shoot lots and lots of them. Nobody is going to shame them into change. But if the military decides that they want to be on the side that will eventually win they might see the benefits of being seen as the heroes of the revolution, as opposed to the lackeys of the old regime.
.
Bill-
You may have something there. 30 years ago if the military hadn’t gone with the students then the situation would be very different indeed.
This is Kathleen in the above comment not Peter. He is controlling the vertical and the horizontal today.
There are reports of some generals being arrested. If true it’s the moment of truth for the military.
.
It puts Obama in a difficult position. If he expresses support for the people it could be used by the regime to paint the rebellion as tools of the Americans, always a crowd pleaser in that part of the world. On the other hand, if the people succeed without our expressed support we end up looking like opportunistic hypocrits who don’t give a rat’s ášš about democracy and freedom. If we back the people and the regime wins we will have eliminated any hope of diplomacy. So the safest bet is the one he’s doing, which is to issue very bland statements and wait to see how it all shakes out. He’s voting present on this one and, in all honesty, I’m not sure that isn’t the smart thing to do.
.
(Though if the attempts to get rid of all news and video from Iran are just the regime getting ready for a Tienanmen style massacre then all bets are off. At some point we have to stand for something, diplomacy be dámņëd.)
If he expresses support for the people it could be used by the regime to paint the rebellion as tools of the Americans
.
Too late, Bill. Some within Iran, including on their government-run TV, are already trying to put the blame on us claiming we’re interfering.
.
I guess even in the middle of a potential revolution there’s time to place the blame on the West, rather than on their own tyrannical methods.
Yeah, it’s the default position…and since they are going to do it anyway maybe that’s a good argument for our just saying to hëll with it and throwing our open support to the people.
.
(It’s been pointed out by other commentators that an awful lot of the protest signs are in English, indicating that they are actively seeking western support.)
maybe that’s a good argument for our just saying to hëll with it and throwing our open support to the people.
.
I wish we could. Maybe if this had happened in Iraq 7-8 years ago, before some idiots thought invading that country who’s people didn’t really want freedom would be a pretty neat idea, AND since Iraq never had nukes, we would toss our hat into the ring and the complaints would be minimal.
.
The nuclear threat alone presents a different set of circumstances with Iran (or North Korea, for that matter).
Bill, just a quick note. The Iranians don’t seem to need feminist literature. They have their own motivations. And they certainly don’t need guns. The revolutionary guard has guns and are better trained in using it. This kind of revolution is not won with guns, it’s won when the army is no longer willing or able to use their guns.
I’d send them feminist literature anyway. Just to mess around with the mullahs. And twice ad much to Saudi Arabia.
.
Well, yeah, when you don’t have guns you are probably limited to hoping that the army will flip. Pretty much your only option. With guns you have other options. Just saying.
No matter what the impetus, no matter how good an idea it might be, I don’t think the American public would swallow us going into another country.
Iran has to drop into a much worse state than it is now for it even to come on the table. The public is going to have to all but BEG to go in.
But if we do, considering what the students are trying to do, if we were, it might just work out the way Iraq was supposed to have gone.
But personally I think this will simmer down, everyone will be hesitant enough to step in that nothing will get done, and it will return to a far tenser version of the status quo.
But…
If I didn’t think the regime in power would have no problem opening up on the crowds, this could just be as big an example of the people just rising up and making things change as the fall of the Berlin Wall.
“No matter what the impetus, no matter how good an idea it might be, I don’t think the American public would swallow us going into another country.”
Well, maybe Mexico.
Just remember…the US has had a history of interfering with Iranian politics–in a very bad way. And folks have a long, long memory on that.
It’s not about us. It’s about self determination. Resist the urge to intervene, but condemn violence and repressive tactics.
Yeah, and it’s a history that most of our population isn’t aware of. We’d rather just think of Iran as the ever-present evil bad guy than face up to our responsibility for their present state. And while we may forget, the Iranians do indeed have long memories.
.
The documentary “Why We Fight” has a great summary of our history in Iran.
I’ve seen evidence of the younger generation of many countries, including the US and Israel, providing technical and moral support to the protesters in Iran. They provide proxies and mirrors, spread news by blog and twitter, joining in demonstrations at embassies and DDoS attacks on Iranian government websites.
The government of Iran is fighting back by blocking proxies as fast as they find them and starting their own Twitter accounts to spread disinformation, there have been intermittent outages of internet and cellular data services and reports of confiscation of satellite dishes.
Iranian tweeters have also reported at least some military refusing to fire on crowds and opposition leaders calling on regular police to help stop attacks on protesters carried out by Arabic speaking foreigners.
What concerns me is that President Ahambreakingbad might simply decide to dispose of Mousavi and be done with it. On the other hand, how potent would Mousavi as a martyr be?
.
I commented elsewhere that it seems more likely that some random soldier would take it upon himself to assassinate Mousavi, thinking it would be helping the situation. And of course, it wouldn’t: regardless of how or why, Mousavi’s death would immediately lead to blaming of the Ayatollah and Mr. Impossibletospell, and would make things far, far worse than they are now.
.
One would think Iran’s leaders aren’t that dumb. But then, they also just thought they could get away with rigging this election.
.
While I don’t want to see anybody hurt or killed, I have all the praise in the world for those in Iran who are willing to fight for their freedom from oppression. Compared to, say, their neighbors in Iraq, who still can’t figure out what freedom is even though we’ve done everything we can to force it upon them.
Heh, sorry, Michael, that I basically repeated some of your words on any potential assassination. That’s what I get for responding before reading everybody else’s posts first. 🙂
I guess none of you remember the 1997 riots under Clinton where he did nothing as well. And how classy is it for PAD to compare Iran where the election was clearly stolen vs Florida where EVERYONE agree Bush won. I’m sorry that is the facts of history. EVEN the NY times says so http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/12/politics/12VOTE.html
your better than this PAD
Well, if the NY Times says so, it must be true.
The Times, like nearly everyone in the media, was firmly in the Bush pocket even before the election. (Go back and read some of the news “reporting” from the month or so leading up to the 2000 election and see just how pro-Bush the media were.) And AFTER the election, during the coverage of the Florida dispute, the media constantly referred to “President-elect Bush” but “Mr Gore” or “Vice-President Gore”.
As to “EVERYONE” agreeing, you have a different definition of “everyone” than do I. Obviously, four Supreme Court justices didn’t agree that Bush won.
That’s a pretty simplified view of history, Matt.
.
Here’s a bit of history that you forgot. A few years ago, Bush started raising money for parties that opposed Ahmadinejad. The Iranian government responded by jailing those US supported groups. The groups started begging the US government to stop supporting them.
.
The “facts of history” are that Iranians are much better off without our interference.
Just to be clear, my post was in response to the beginning of Matt’s post, where he talked about doing nothing in response to a riot. Not to the rest of his post about Bush v. Gore.
.
Honestly, I can’t even see why Matt is wading into the Bush v. Gore debate. PAD barely mentioned it and didn’t come remotely close to claiming that they were similar.
Honestly, I can’t even see why Matt is wading into the Bush v. Gore debate. PAD barely mentioned it and didn’t come remotely close to claiming that they were similar.
.
He’s mentioning it because the default position of some is that even a passing joke reference is seen as a concerted attack on Bush.
.
PAD
I like an argument as much as the next guy who spends all day on the internet, but you gotta pick your moments.
Sorry, Matt, not everyone agrees the election wasn’t stolen.
.
And by the way, Matt, you need remedial help with spelling and punctuation. It would help you make your points better.
Prime Directive. ‘Nuff said.
Yes, and what a hard and fast rule that was.
So we can go in and dìçk with stuff as long as we wear disguises? We can do that…
There also seemed to be a loop hole that if someone from the Federation had already meddled to create the situation, then all bets were off.
“You created a Nazi planet? Well then, I guess the Prime Directive is irrelevant and we can enjoy a nice day of punching Space-Nazis in the face.”
Who wouldn’t take the opportunity to spend the day punching space-nazis in the face, though? That’s my definition of a nice day!
As Commander Stone pointed out in ROCK & A HARD PLACE (Peter David author) “The society was headed for change. The old regime stood in the way of that change. How is helping depose that regime interfering with the normal development of that society?” The quote isn’t exact, but the idea I believe is. I’m a big fan of allowing people to go to hëll in their own chosen way and the government can stay out of it. But there are times when people are forced into that hëll by their government and maybe it’s time for someone from outside to fix that.
If nothing else, it shows that the supposed bad guys of the world don’t lead monolithic groups diametrically opposed to our exsistence. That said, though, while it might be attractive to lend whatever help we can, like James said, prime directive.
And, Jason, speaking as one who’s argued on stage, try Mr. Barnard, room 12.