amadeus
Serenity now
Just wondering, are these Iranians ones that were born and grew up after the revolution, or did any of them actually know what living under the Shah was?
So, who's next: Iran or North Korea?
- Thread starter joespaniel
- Start date
Just wondering, are these Iranians ones that were born and grew up after the revolution, or did any of them actually know what living under the Shah was?
ozscott75
Groper of Sand
Does that matter?
To answer your question, both. The older generation remember the Shah and the 'western' lifestyle they led, they also remember the rampant corruption and the fact that life wasn't all roses.
They remember living in a virtual theocracy too.
All agree that they have more freedom now.
Yes, it does matter. There is a difference of opinion between the young and older generations. However many from both generations agree that this current government is unjust.
The Shah was no saint, I'll grant you that, however life was better under his rule than this current Islamic Republic state it is in.
Is that so? How many people did you talk with, 5?
I never was in Iran. My brother and my parents were. They left because if they stayed they would have been killed since they were not Muslim. They left because they would have been killed since my father was building a library in honor of the Shah. I have never seen my grandparents, aunt, cousins, or other family that remain there. My remaining family there that I do keep in contact with are still alive. They are living their lives, but not the same as people used to.
What do you think freedom is ozscott75? Do you think that not allowing people to attend university because they are of a different religion is freedom? In place of attending universities, those students study at homes and take assessment tests to mail to other universities in different countries in hopes of getting out of the country so they can study to make something of themselves - but the government instead walks in, and takes the tests away not allowing those youth to apply to any university. Do you believe that people having to live in fear of their government if they speak up is freedom? Do you believe that forcing women to cover themselves head to toe is freedom? (That is not Islamic law - it is a law created by men in the name of Islam.)
If you think that Iran's government provides more freedom than it did under the Shah - your definition of freedom is very diluted.
And it is only a wonder that thousands upon thousands of Iranians living in America, that go back and forth from the US to Iran - that have immigrated from there - all wish that the Shah had never been overthrown. It is a wonder that so many students protest the government in hopes of change. It is a wonder that you believe that Iran has a fair government.
ozscott75
Groper of Sand
Jeratain,
I cannot speak to your experiences. I can only relate what I am told. Whilst I am sure that you have a different view or Iran to that of the people I speak to, could that not be coloured by your family's experience?
I cannot speak to your experiences. I can only relate what I am told. Whilst I am sure that you have a different view or Iran to that of the people I speak to, could that not be coloured by your family's experience?
The few Iranians I've met seem to share his view also. Funny, in the 80's I worked with an Iraqi and a Iranian at the same time (both were students at the time). They got along great and the two of them agreed that the leaders of both countries were idiots.
Well, if you'd like some unbiased sources, that's hard to come by since most people that dissaprove of the current government in Iran have reason to be biased. However, I suppose News Sources can help you a bit.
Iran women rally to demand equal rights to men
Journalists protest crackdown
U.N. Human Rights Team in Iran After 7-Year Absence
There are hundreds more - but I think if you really care, you'll do your own research on this. I highly reccomend you read this, as it was posted in the NY Times.
______
The Fight for Iran's Democratic Ideals
Saeed Razavi-Faqih and Ian Urbina
Over the weekend thousands of Iranian students continued their protests to demand political reform. Their voices were raised in support of Hashem Aghajari, the college professor who has been sentenced to death for blasphemy. But the student movement is broader than dissent over one injustice.
What is it that the protesters are saying? The original ideals of the 1979 Iranian Revolution were democracy and social justice, coupled with a respect for the nation's distinct cultural identity. At the time, even the clergy emphasized the necessity of democratic rights and tolerance. These ideals were codified in the country's constitution. Article 56 explicitly states that God made man ''master of his own social destiny,'' and that ''no one can deprive man of this divine right, nor subordinate it to the vested interests of a particular individual or group.'' Unfortunately, these founding ideals have been violated repeatedly. The proud traditions and norms of Iran are what the students seek to revitalize. Theirs is not a counterrevolution but a completion of the present one.
The issue of free and critical expression is, of course, crucial for students and professors. In the past two years, 83 reformist publications have been shut down by the conservative judiciary. Internet cafes are monitored; television is censored. These trends are not new. It was student protests against the closure of a reformist newspaper in 1999 that caused religious conservatives in the government to unleash paramilitary units on our campuses, killing one and injuring countless others. The death sentence recently placed on Mr. Aghajari shows the danger posed to universities as sanctuaries for open debate.
But there is far more at stake than the academy. At issue is the status of accountability and democracy for society as a whole. A minority of unelected religious conservatives claim to speak for public opinion, yet they arrest the very pollsters who dare to demonstrate otherwise. The issue facing the Iranian people is whether they have the right to discuss religious reform and the question of ''Islamic Protestantism'' or any other politically sensitive matter without the slander of apostasy and the threat of death or imprisonment. It is telling that the student protesters are as diverse as they are committed. Many are secular, but just as many are highly devout Muslims. They all share the same desire for political and civil rights.
Students are suppressed by a governing system that has made everything political, from hem lines to hijabs, from the Koran to the curriculum. Many have grown frustrated that reformist promises from President Mohammad Khatami remain out of reach even as reformism is now discussed at kitchen tables everywhere. Still, time is on the protesters' side. With 65 percent of the national population under the age of 30, the question of reform is not whether it will come, but how soon.
Unfortunately, the Bush administration's posture toward Iran has not been helpful. President Bush's harsh comment that Iran is part of the ''axis of evil'' has allowed Iran's conservatives to claim they are defenders of the republic while they tighten the reins on the reformist majority. Now with the threat of war against Iraq coming to our borders, the conservatives have been conveniently handed another excuse to crack down on dissent and democratization.
Iran's students will continue to seek political evolution, one that is without violence and gradual, but certainly no less determined in its democratic aspirations.
_____
Ancient Grudge
Its all in this life
and with other such good countires such as isreal and america ignoring the U.N why should other countries respect it?
Since the US could veto any resolution that says it's illegal for a country to use force to enforce a resolution, it's unlikely there would be one to ignore, but I'm not (and don't even have a wish to play one on TV) an international lawyer.
As far as Israel, both they and the Arabs need to be taken to task for violating 242 and subsequent resolutions. Withdraw from occupied terratories, recognize the sovereignty of all states. Land for peace. Sounds so easy, yet it seems so hard to do B-/
Panda
Metal head
Calling current Iran a democracy is stretching it - a lot. Just like calling the Shah's regime democratic is laughable. But then again, the CIA installed the Shah and trained his secret police, so it's no wonder out silly little boy from Minnesota advocates him. 
Currently, president Khatami (spelling?) is doing an admirable job in steadily increasing the powers of the democratically elected, secular leadership without steering Iran into civil war. Changing a country from a fundamentalist theocracy into a democracy isn't going to happen over night.
Even though a lot of work needs to be done, at least they are on the right path. Keeping up the sabre-rattling gun boat diplomacy will more likely stall, if not alltogether hinder democratic process in Iran and strenghten the religious nutters.
Currently, president Khatami (spelling?) is doing an admirable job in steadily increasing the powers of the democratically elected, secular leadership without steering Iran into civil war. Changing a country from a fundamentalist theocracy into a democracy isn't going to happen over night.
Even though a lot of work needs to be done, at least they are on the right path. Keeping up the sabre-rattling gun boat diplomacy will more likely stall, if not alltogether hinder democratic process in Iran and strenghten the religious nutters.
Ancient Grudge
Its all in this life
i dont think you grasped my point about the U.S they are willing to go to war without U.N backing and if neccesary to go to war alone. so if they ignore the U.N why ohh why should say india or pakistan or china or tiwan or anyother countries for that matter then respect it. Is it becasue these countries will then fear the U.S do you really want that?
I grasped your point, I was just pointing out that there is no UN resolution against enforcing UN resolutions. And, why should those countries respect a UN that does not enforce it's resolutions?
One of the biggest complaints against the US is that it says one thing, and does another. Under the previous administration Congress passed and the President signed a law making it US policy for the disarmamant of Iraq and liberating it's people from Saddam. The current administration is going to use direct force instead of a proxy war fought by the Iraqi opposistion groups envisioned by the previous one.
Certainly the US acting is a risk in that it can incite fanatical backlash, but doing nothing would just further prove the west's indifference to the plight of third world countries for the sake of it's own peace and security.
I think it was Churchill who said something on the lines of "You've accepted dishonour to avoid war. Now you have both dishonour and war."
Ancient Grudge
Its all in this life
i am not saying that the U.N is perfect i think its practically worthless if they would back action against all regimes in africa and middle east then it would be of some use but all they do is pick their arses they are a bunch of muppets.
but if the U.S ignores the U.N then they cant complain when others ignore the U.N
but if the U.S ignores the U.N then they cant complain when others ignore the U.N
From all the news sources, the US is absolutely not ignoring the UN right now. The front pages of just about every newspaper prove quite the opposite. And they are in fact trying to get the UN to take action against one of those very regimes that you mention.
Ancient Grudge
Its all in this life
amadeus
Serenity now
Originally posted by Panda
Calling current Iran a democracy is stretching it - a lot. Just like calling the Shah's regime democratic is laughable. But then again, the CIA installed the Shah and trained his secret police, so it's no wonder out silly little boy from Minnesota advocates him.
The Shah was the lesser of two evils, period.
ozscott75
Groper of Sand
The favourite statement of the US right-wing. The lesser of two evils.
How about not dealing with any evils? Maybe then, they won't come back to bite you on the arse.
Ancient Grudge
Its all in this life
do you seriously believe that the U.S and Britain will not go to war if the U.N says not to?
Stile
Emperor
It seems we're the only ones that don't ignore the UN these days. This quote was based on information from the Council for Foreign Relations.
Saying nations ignoring the UN will be a product of any US action is like saying killing a dead man will be the result of not paying a ransom.
