[Lurker]

I'm not going to reread my post. I probably wasn't clear so I'll just say what I really mean.

Originally Posted by ni'k

the best thing about the revolutionary movement in Iran is that they DON'T WANT WESTERN LIBERAL DEMOCRACY AND THEY ARE NOT RIOTING BECAUSE THAT EVIL OLD SUPREME LEADER WON'T LET THEM WEAR SHORT SKIRTS AND HAVE MCDONALDS AND IPODS. THEY WANT SOMETHING ELSE.

I don't mean that but they do clearly want democracy. The protests did start after what was probably a rigged vote.

Originally Posted by ni'k

how the fuck does a war in iraq make them "more aware of the outside world" do you really think they are some sort of tribe of primitives who lived alone far in the mid east with no contact with us modern civilised sorts?

Haha, I don't literally mean they didn't know about other countries! I meant with those wars they know that there are other nations who really oppose dictatorship. It helps to make it clear that Iran's hostility to America etc and development of nuclear weapons is just isolating and unhealthy. those wars hammered that home.

Originally Posted by ni'k

ONLY SOMEONE WITH NO CONCEPTION OF IRAN BEYOND WESTERN MEDIA REPORTS ABOUT HOW THEY USED TWITTER TO SPREAD THE REVOLUTION COULD POST SOMETHING LIKE THAT. I'm sorry. But what the fuck.

I don't think I've heard about them using Twitter...I'm curious to know where you get your "conceptions" from that isn't the liberal media?

Originally Posted by ni'k

"I think the protest movement in Iraq is a serious threat to Ahmadinejad's government and I don't think this would have developed without a safer, more democratic middle east." WHAT THE FUCK PLANET ARE YOU ON? SINCE THE INVASION OF IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN THE MIDDLE EAST HAS GOTTEN PRETTY FUCKING UNSTABLE. HOW HAS THE INVASION MADE IT SAFER IN ANY WAY?

Unstable, yes, but safer for Iran. The insrugents in Afghanistan and Iraq are in no way a threat to iran. Saddam was.
Remember Iran and Iraq have fought each other before and we all know that Saddam had a desire to increase his territory. If Iran was unstable due to a rebellion then that would be the opportunity for any nation to attack, when the country is in disarray. So Iranians could not have rebelled until now.

Originally Posted by ni'k

I'm sorry but you actually think the Iranians saw the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and said "well shit, look at how well that's going, time we get ourselves up to speed with modernity and ditch the turbans and start using electricity and stop sacrificing goats to allah!"

No I don't. I think it would have had a more subtle effect. I feeling of increased safety, of liberation.
And as far as I can tell Iran is more modernised than Iraq and Afghanistan were/are.

Originally Posted by ni'k

It's ironic that your conception of the Iranian people does not extend beyond a vastly misrepresented and shallow stereotype that you probably gathered from stories planted in the western media by American intelligence agencies to prepare the population for a future invasion, and you say the Iranians need democracy!

Why ironic?
I really don't think Iran should invaded, that would be fucking bad idea.

Originally Posted by ni'k

In their stupidity and hubris, the neo con cabal that orchestrated the invasion thought they'd be in and out of iraq and afghanistan in no time, and move swiftly onto Iran. They have no military bases there and it's from a strategic point they want it for control of the region and to transport oil across. The Iranians know this, they know that what happened in Iraq is what could happen to them. To suggest that this would make them more open to the west is absurd. There are people in Iran, as their are in the West, who are aware of the frightened, violent and sadistic patriarchs in both their governments and the evil they commit. You seem to suggest that the Iranians need a revolution, but we in the West don't. Because we have democracy. Which means we have freedom. Our leaders bestow it on us! It's called democracy because the people in charge give it to us! If only those poor middle eastern people could have freedom given to them too. I can just picture you back in 04 strolling thru Crawford ranch talkin' politics with George.

As I said I don't think freedom should be given to the Iranians. They should get it themselves.
You also seem to be saying that we need revolutions in the west. Why, where and of what sort?