Protests in Iran

[skidkid]

It is awfully arrogant to assume that if one has those traits that one tends to be conservative, or Republican for that matter if you go by party affiliation. Or that the military has a monopoly on hard work and well educated, I am certain the employes of Google ad countless other companies would disagree. Plus, you can't exactly quantify 'hard working' or 'well read'. I didn't see copies of the paper or War and Peace sitting around the squadron that often, usually Sports Illustrated or Maxim. And the smoke pits or Goat Locker aren't exactly hotbeds of hard work.

Here is some interesting Gallup polling on veterans and active duty political affiliations. I believe they are a little more reliable than the Military Times polling that is often cited by many, since Military Times subscribers are are more likely to be more senior and careerist and are in fact in the minority in the military. While veterans and active duty skew a little bit more Republican it is often not as 'overwhelming' as many believe.

I really don't want to wade into the swamp that is politics on the internet but I think the gallup poll is perhaps a little suspect. The closest the two graphs come to meeting are the age groups that would have been subject to the draft and therefore more representative of society as a whole than years of volunteer forces. It should not come as as shock to anyone that most militaries the world over are fairly conservative organizations. If perhaps the ivory tower of academia would allow god forbid an ROTC unit on campus the graph might even out a little in peace time but don't hold your breath.

As far as Iran goes does anyone seriously think that there is even a semblance of democracy there? I am sure public stonings are a real impediment to getting to the polls.

 

[HercDriver]

There can be no greater affirmation that I am on the right path than negative rep from Herc Driver, guardian of "dumb JO's" and protector of AirWarriors bandwidth:



Oh, if only I ever used facts:



I put the facts and supporting evidence in bold just to help you out.

Thanks Herc, you made my afternoon.

No problem-glad to help, but I didn't know rep points meant so much to you. Looks like you take that stuff a bit too seriously...(also who are you quoting with the phrase "dumb JO's"...and why the apostrophe?)

No one is doubting your awesome cut & paste skills, but you know that wasn't the post I rep'd you on. You have a tough time debating folks without ranting, and it looked like you were going off the deep end again. I was just trying to gently guide you back to reality. It seems like you might benefit from this type of guidance (since you take reps so seriously) instead of giving you an infraction.

If you have any further issue with me, please feel free to shoot me a pm or another one of your poorly-worded negative reps; I'm guessing most folks on here have no desire to hear about your affirmations or hurt feelings anymore.:icon_wink

Back to topic: The BBC is reporting that Iran's Guardian Council has announced that a "re-count" of Friday's votes will take place, following the official challenge to the results by Mousavi and Karroubi. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/8102400.stm

What I find amazing are the lopsided results. Almost all of the challengers lost in their home districts and FiveThirtyEight.com has some fascinating graphs on the returns. One that caught my eye was a comparison between the 2005 returns of provinces Medhi Karroubi won over Ahmadinejad, and 2009 returns of the same provinces. Karroubi beat Ahmadinejad handily in 2005, averaging about 40% more votes, but somehow this year he got less than 3% of the votes, while Ahmadinejad averaged about 60% of the votes.

It looks like the folks who fixed the vote should have made it more of a squeaker and less of a blow out.

 

[Flash]

I really don't want to wade into the swamp that is politics on the internet but I think the gallup poll is perhaps a little suspect. The closest the two graphs come to meeting are the age groups that would have been subject to the draft and therefore more representative of society as a whole than years of volunteer forces. It should not come as as shock to anyone that most militaries the world over are fairly conservative organizations. If perhaps the ivory tower of academia would allow god forbid an ROTC unit on campus the graph might even out a little in peace time but don't hold your breath.

Shouldn't that be where they are closest? One thing to note, as Gallup does, is that men are more likely to vote Republican. Since most veterans are men, that can account for some of it, especially when we had the draft.

As far as Iran goes does anyone seriously think that there is even a semblance of democracy there? I am sure public stonings are a real impediment to getting to the polls.

Meybe their version of democracy, but even that is a bit of a ways off.

 

[exhelodrvr]

Two good columns on this topic. Pretty strong arguments for the idea that this is just an internal struggle over political power/money, not over ideas, with Moussavi highly unlikely to be a "reformer" in the sense that many in the West seem to think he is.

http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2009/06/16/the-moving-finger-writes/

http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2009/06/15/follow-the-money/

 

[OUSOONER]

^-------- I agree. Also, I can always count on Bevo for a good show.

I really do think the point is not so much who is up for election or who wins..because it really doesn't matter. The Presidency is really a dog and pony show. The Supreme Leader and his council are the policy makers/enforcers.

As said earlier, the point is, finally people are showing that they will not just sit quietly any longer. The government is getting called out and people are no longer afraid to do so.

The old Mullah's are dying off...yeah, new ones will always keep re-emerging, but the younger people of my generation with dreams of some sort of democracy and the freedoms they miss out on, are growing in increasing numbers.

It's these people who are going to make a change in Iran, or their children, if they pass on the same beliefs. The more restless and fed up they get, eventually (hopefully), Iran can change within itself and not need an outside power to help it do so.

That being said, I would be happy to assist in toppling that regime if it ever came to that. I hope it doesn't, but if it did...I would hope it would be more of a coalition between us, our allies, and a very large resistance force of the Iranian population.

 

[Bevo16]

Death toll for the protests is climbing. More than a dozen at this point, and Foxnews says that they are trying to get all media shut down. I just hope that it does not turn into another Tiananmen Square type situation. Tell your fam to stay safe sooner. Hopefully their overlords will hear what they have to say.

OBTW, you never answered the question. Newport, or Oklahoma?

 

[Mumbles]

Death toll for the protests is climbing. More than a dozen at this point, and Foxnews says that they are trying to get all media shut down. I just hope that it does not turn into another Tiananmen Square type situation. Tell your fam to stay safe sooner. Hopefully their overlords will hear what they have to say.

OBTW, you never answered the question. Newport, or Oklahoma?

And I think that our silence with regard to this violence is deafening.....
(sort of like our response to the TD-2 launch, etc...) So because "we didn't have election observers in Tehran" to make a statement of condemnation would be "meddling" in the internal affairs of Iran?? (Maybe we should have sent ACORN or these guys to observe...

) Since when was an American President averse to supporting freedom loving peoples of the world? POTUS certainly has no compunction moralizing to the Israelis.

 

[nursesoon]

Meddling in Iran is why we have such poor diplomatic relations with Iran right now. Supporting unrest would make any later talks or diplomacy with the standing government, which isn’t going to be overthrown anytime soon, impossible.

 

[FMRAM]

Historically meddling with Iran has not worked well for us, I doubt it would be wise for us to be anything but an observer at this point.

 

[Bevo16]

Meddling in Iran is why we have such poor diplomatic relations with Iran right now. Supporting unrest would make any later talks or diplomacy with the standing government, which isn?t going to be overthrown anytime soon, impossible.

zoomie08 can rest easy. He has been relieved of his title of "most ignorant statement ever" after only 37 hours. Face-Palm.

This is the same country that has been supplying everything from small arms, to IED's, to surface to air missiles along with the manpower to employ and expertise of how to use those weapons TO KILL OUR US AND OUR BROTHERS IN ARMS for the better part of a decade!!! You don't think that their OVERT support of the terrorists that have been destabalizing Iraq has anything to do with the "poor diplomatic relations"? How about their stated desire to kill every living Jew? How about their constant threats to Israel, and their persuit of nuclear weapons? It's kind of hard to have positive diplomatic relations with a government of that mind set.

I am not saying that we need to throw ourselves in the middle of of this thing right now, but the "Blame America First" bullshit has got to be called out for what it is. Iran and their support of terror for the past 30 years is the reason that we have "poor diplomatic relations" with them.

Here is a picture from the Iranian Hostage Crisis. You know, when they took over our Embassy and kept all of our DIPLOMATS hostage. Maybe you can tell me who the guy is with the circle around him. He has been in the news lately. If you REALLY still think that the United States is to blame here, research November 4th, 1979. You will find some interesting reading.

 

[Mumbles]

How could issuing a statement of condemnation of the violent persecution of the peaceful, youthful, pro-Western protesters be considered meddling??

 

[nursesoon]

Obama: Troubled by Iran election but sees change

"I do believe that something has happened in Iran," with Iranians more willing to question the government's "antagonistic postures" toward the world, Obama said.

 

[Bevo16]

What does that say other than the man is watching the news?

 

[nursesoon]

What do you want him to say, we have no hard proof the election was rigged and coming out supporting the protesters could actual make them lose support in that area of the world.

 

[nursesoon]

Bevo, I copied your post 42 to my little liberal haven to give it some diversity. New board, we don't have hardly any conservatives. *********** if you want to debate there. I'll take it down and just leave the link if you are worried about your words being copied though.