Iran warns it would increase missile range if threatened by Europe

[geriatrickid]

On 11/25/2017 at 9:38 PM, craigt3365 said:

The Iranians are basically good people. Sadly, their government is horrible.

Oh please. That is a tired refrain. If the Iranians are such good people, why are they regularly out in the streets demanding the death and destruction of infidels, the USA, Israel, idol worshippers (hello Hindus and Buddhists)?

Need a reminder from last week?  

 

 

 

Iran is a hostile nation that actively funds terrorists, has violated UN sanctions  with its support of Assad, and its support of Shiite militias in Iraq and has actively sought to start civil unrest in Lebanon, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and  the Gulf states.

All this is done with the unwavering support of the Iranian population.

 

Iran is the  nation where Shia Muslims slash and whip themselves bloody for the day of Ashura  and you expect us to believe that they are a nation capable of rational behavior? Death and destruction is celebrated in their land. The Europeans have no idea what they are dealing with. Whatever the Iranians faults, they are not afraid to die for their jihad and will gladly rain down death and destruction on Europe, all the while singing and shouting. Hopefully, they target Belgium and Germany first because those two countries have done their utmost to  maintain trade relations and access to Iranian oil and deserve some retribution from the munitions they bought for the Iranians with their oil purchases.

 

 

 

 

 

[craigt3365]

35 minutes ago, geriatrickid said:

Oh please. That is a tired refrain. If the Iranians are such good people, why are they regularly out in the streets demanding the death and destruction of infidels, the USA, Israel, idol worshippers (hello Hindus and Buddhists)?

Need a reminder from last week? 

 

Understood! That same logic could be applied to many countries who have nut job white supremacists causing chaos. So all of America, Germany, Sweden, Russia, etc are bad?

 

Some in Iran are fanatics. Most aren't. Per the experience of many I know who've traveled there.

 

The government there is terrible. Most of the people are not.

[billd766]

5 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

The West hasn't broken the terms of the agreement. Research Iran's history of breaking promises and lying. It's a looooong list.

 

You are so one sided. And in support of a government like Iran. Very bizarre.

 

You of course are not one sided and have no bias to any country at all.

[Srikcir]

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

The government there is terrible. Most of the people are not.

A poll of Iranians taken just before the nuclear deal went into full effect showed:

• 72% backed the deal and 80% approved of better relations with Europe
• 71% had an unfavorable view of the United States
• 34% of those polled had confidence that the United States would carry out its obligations under the Deal

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-02-03/new-poll-says-iranians-like-zarif-dislike-us

The Iranian people seem more consistent with their government than Americans.

[Morch]

19 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

A poll of Iranians taken just before the nuclear deal went into full effect showed:

• 72% backed the deal and 80% approved of better relations with Europe
• 71% had an unfavorable view of the United States
• 34% of those polled had confidence that the United States would carry out its obligations under the Deal

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-02-03/new-poll-says-iranians-like-zarif-dislike-us

The Iranian people seem more consistent with their government than Americans.

 

The Iranian people do not enjoy the same accesses to information or the same freedom of expression as people in the USA do. There is nothing in the USA approaching the level of control on media and power to shape public views which exists in Iran.

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, Srikcir said:

A poll of Iranians taken just before the nuclear deal went into full effect showed:

• 72% backed the deal and 80% approved of better relations with Europe
• 71% had an unfavorable view of the United States
• 34% of those polled had confidence that the United States would carry out its obligations under the Deal

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-02-03/new-poll-says-iranians-like-zarif-dislike-us

The Iranian people seem more consistent with their government than Americans.

Considering the propaganda from the government, impossible for the people to know the truth. They support these anti US and anti West rallies,  paint huge murals on buildings saying down with the US, etc.

 

If all your life you are told the color red is actually green, guess what? You'll always call it that way.

 

The Iranians deserve better.

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, billd766 said:

 

You of course are not one sided and have no bias to any country at all.

So you are saying Iran has never lied nor been deceptive? On par with Norway?

 

I have a massive bias. Towards the truth.

[Srikcir]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

The Iranian people do not enjoy the same accesses to information or the same freedom of expression as people in the USA do. There is nothing in the USA approaching the level of control on media and power to shape public views which exists in Iran.

Then you have at least weakened if not neutralized your conclusion that Iranian people are not terrible versus the Iranian government because (you say) the people lack sufficient information to behave otherwise. Externally no one would have any basis for conclusion other than what Iranians are seen to express. 

 

Furthermore, there is no certain converse - that with unfiltered access to information the Iranian people's views would necessarily be different than that of their government. In the last Iranian presidential elections 57% of voters chose moderate reformist and Iranian architect of the nuclear deal current President Hassan Rouhani over hardliner conservative former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

 

Thus, Iranian people do seem politically savy even without all the information freedoms found in Western nations. 

[Morch]

1 minute ago, Srikcir said:

Then you have at least weakened if not neutralized your conclusion that Iranian people are not terrible versus the Iranian government because (you say) the people lack sufficient information to behave otherwise. Externally no one would have any basis for conclusion other than what Iranians are seen to express. 

 

Furthermore, there is no certain converse - that with unfiltered access to information the Iranian people's views would necessarily be different than that of their government. In the last Iranian presidential elections 57% of voters chose moderate reformist and Iranian architect of the nuclear deal current President Hassan Rouhani over hardliner conservative former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

 

Thus, Iranian people do seem politically savy even without all the information freedoms found in Western nations. 

 

You are mixing my posts with @craigt3365's views. Don't think I've made any strong comments about national moral character of Iranians. My personal experience with Iranians is sort of like most other people - some ok, some not so much.

 

I don't think that comparing public sentiment and political positions between countries supporting very different systems of governance, culture and social structure is a very solid proposition. Never said anything about having better access to information necessarily shifting Iranian public opinion this way or that. People commenting on foreign leaders and politicians often toss about terms like "moderate", "hardliner" or even "reformist" and whatnot. Many a time, these more closely associated with projected ideas rather than being a true representation of what is on offer (Aung San Suu Kyi being a good, if unrelated, example of this).

 

"Thus..." how?

 

 

[puck2]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

The Iranian people do not enjoy the same accesses to information or the same freedom of expression as people in the USA do. There is nothing in the USA approaching the level of control on media and power to shape public views which exists in Iran.

 

Yes. It's a pity that Iranian people cannot watch „Fox“. Polls in the West? Experts say, give me the desired result, then you'll get your poll.

 

Morch, think twice about your comment. The people in the USA have the freedom of chosing their medias, that's right. But who controlls fake and manipulated news? The Iranians have their mullah-regime, the USA have a much, much more complicated system controlled and influenced (advertising!!!) by the BIG MONEY. The Iranians would like to have a relative free press system, but are not able to use it as the people in the West. The West - and specialy the USA – have a free system, but a big part of the populace doesn't have time, the will or the intelligence to read/understand  biased press properly.

 

Why is Fox treated like a „government“ channel by an incompetent, sick liar? The connection to your comment: dou you believe the grewing number of Fox viewers are better informed than the Iranians? In general, the result of this poll shows that the Iranians are able to recognise manipulated news in contrast to a lot of the „freely“ informed.

Edited November 28, 2017 by puck2

[Morch]

1 minute ago, puck2 said:

 

Yes. It's a pity that Iranian people cannot watch „Fox“. Polls in the West? Experts say, give me the desired result, then you'll get your poll.

 

Morch, think twice about your comment. The people in the USA have the freedom of chosing their medias, that's right. But who controlls fake and manipulated news? The Iranians have their mullah-regime, the USA have a much, much more complicated system controlled and influenced (advertising!!!) by the BIG MONEY. The Iranians would like to have a relative free press system, but are not able to use it as the people in the West. The West - and specialy the USA – have a free system, but a big part of the populace don't have time, the will or the intelligence to read/understand  biased press properly.

 

Why is Fox treated like a „government“ channel by an incompetent, sick liar? The connection to your comment: dou you believe the grewing number of Fox viewers are better informed than the Iranians? In general, the result of this poll shows that the Iranians are able to recognise manipulated news in contrast to a lot of the „freely“ informed.

 

Ah, the same-same argument? Not buying, thanks. And there was nothing said about Fox, or any specific media outlet. Have fun ranting.

[puck2]

3 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Ah, the same-same argument? Not buying, thanks. And there was nothing said about Fox, or any specific media outlet. Have fun ranting.

If you are not able to understand that Fox is a synonym for biased

"information" in the USA,  it's your problem.

BTW, ranting - but no substance in your answer.

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, puck2 said:

If you are not able to understand that Fox is a synonym for biased

"information" in the USA,  it's your problem.

BTW, ranting - but no substance in your answer.

 

 

[billd766]

8 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

So you are saying Iran has never lied nor been deceptive? On par with Norway?

 

I have a massive bias. Towards the truth.

 

But what is the "truth"?

 

Your version, my version, somebody else's version?

[mauGR1]

3 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

But what is the "truth"?

 

Your version, my version, somebody else's version?

For sure we may be forgiven if we don't entirely trust US version of the truth.

[dundee48]

15 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

The West hasn't broken the terms of the agreement. Research Iran's history of breaking promises and lying. It's a looooong list.

 

You are so one sided. And in support of a government like Iran. Very bizarre.

Any country that is rabidly anti Israel gets his vote every time no matter what else it does.

[ilostmypassword]

9 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Considering the propaganda from the government, impossible for the people to know the truth. They support these anti US and anti West rallies,  paint huge murals on buildings saying down with the US, etc.

 

If all your life you are told the color red is actually green, guess what? You'll always call it that way.

 

The Iranians deserve better.

How do you reconcile that statement with the fact that the Iranian people overwhelmingly vote for candidates who are not favored by the mullahs in charge.

[hawker9000]

On ‎11‎/‎26‎/‎2017 at 9:12 PM, billd766 said:

 

You sound as though you are one.

 

Please tell me what qualifies you to rubbish my post and makes YOU an expert?

 

Are YOU a military expert? What makes you think that I have no idea what is going on in the world?

 

Have you ever served in any military?

You betcha'.   Mostly on carriers.

 

Any other questions there, genius?

[craigt3365]

8 hours ago, billd766 said:

 

But what is the "truth"?

 

Your version, my version, somebody else's version?

Sounds like something th Iranian government would say. Best for you to look up the definition in the dictionary.

[craigt3365]

8 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

For sure we may be forgiven if we don't entirely trust US version of the truth.

Agreed! That's why I follow the U.N.'s version. Which has a looooong list of violations.

 

7 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

How do you reconcile that statement with the fact that the Iranian people overwhelmingly vote for candidates who are not favored by the mullahs in charge.

It's great they vote. Sadly, only hand picked candidates can run. Iran is not a democracy. You know that.

[ilostmypassword]

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

Agreed! That's why I follow the U.N.'s version. Which has a looooong list of violations.

 

It's great they vote. Sadly, only hand picked candidates can run. Iran is not a democracy. You know that.

Not true. It is true that the mullahs block many candidates. But far from all. As anybody who actually knows anything about the Iranian elections, the candidate for Prime Minister they preferred lost. Or are you seriously contending that the current PM was "hand-picked" by the mullahs. If you're correct, I'm sure you'll have no problem citing an authoritative source to support your contention. Good luck! You'll need it.

[Srikcir]

49 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Iran is not a democracy. You know that.

Iran is a theocracy.

That doesn't give cause to deny respect for the nation's sovereignty and its people.

 

Recall that in 1979 an undemocratic, despotic monarchy was overthrown by a Shia-Islamic Revolution. This was not a covert insurgency but a general movement supported by a majority of the Iranian Muslim population who to this day continue to support the theocracy that falls short of a full democratic society. Ironically, it was Iraq under dictator Saddam whose invasion of Iran in 1980 with military and financial support from in part the US that solidified legitimacy of the theocracy by the Iranian people.

 

Iran's theocracy is evolving - "from ultra-radical positions that they took in the first two, three or four years [after the Revolution] to a much more moderate, pragmatic position. With .... agreement on the nuclear issue... this is their effort to become a normal country that actually participates in the world" (underlined emphasis added)  http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2014/01/iran-1979-revolution-shook-world-2014121134227652609.html

 

To dismiss the legitimacy of the Iranian government and its policies because it's not a democracy is not only short-sighted but unfair to the Iranian people. I believe the nuclear deal succeeded because of mutual respect among all the participant nations in the agreement. Any resolution of Iran's alleged nuclear-capability missile development should be approached in the same manner - respect for the Iranian people and their government. To bluster threats against them is a non-starter to negotiations.

 

[craigt3365]

Hold on. I was commenting on something completely different. Where did i say I didn't respect their sovereignty? Or didn't respect their people? Please show where I posted that or retract your comments.

 

They are not a democracy and the people don't get to vote for who they like as candidates are not picked via democratic methods. This is well known. And well documented. Though some here try to deny that.

 

As you say, the people there deserve better.

 

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, craigt3365 said:

Hold on. I was commenting on something completely different. Where did i say I didn't respect their sovereignty? Or didn't respect their people? Please show where I posted that or retract your comments.

 

They are not a democracy and the people don't get to vote for who they like as candidates are not picked via democratic methods. This is well known. And well documented. Though some here try to deny that.

 

As you say, the people there deserve better.

 

Again, you're wrong. Candidates are picked by democratic methods. Some are blocked by the mullahs. Many are not as the recent elections demonstrate. While ultimate power is in the hands of the mullahs, there is some level of democracy in Iran.

How Iran Became an Undemocratic Democracy

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/17/world/middleeast/iran-presidential-election-democracy.html

[craigt3365]

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/05/why-do-iranians-even-bother-voting/526866/

 

Why Do Iranians Bother Voting?

 

On Friday, they will cast ballots in their presidential elections—precisely because they do not believe in their system.

 

Voting in Iran, one is left to imagine, is only for the true believers or for the easily duped, participants in a collective act of dissembling that adds up to nothing.

[craigt3365]

18 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Again, you're wrong. Candidates are picked by democratic methods. Some are blocked by the mullahs. Many are not as the recent elections demonstrate. While ultimate power is in the hands of the mullahs, there is some level of democracy in Iran.

How Iran Became an Undemocratic Democracy

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/17/world/middleeast/iran-presidential-election-democracy.html

Right. 100% democratic. You've lost your credibility.

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/interactive/2017/05/iran-election-explainer-170503114917157.html

 

The Guardian Council, which is an appointed body, is responsible for vetting all nominees for the presidential election and allowing only those that it sees as acceptable to run. They have so far held to the opinion that the word "rejal" in the constitution refers only to men.

 

[ilostmypassword]

20 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Right. 100% democratic. You've lost your credibility.

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/interactive/2017/05/iran-election-explainer-170503114917157.html

 

The Guardian Council, which is an appointed body, is responsible for vetting all nominees for the presidential election and allowing only those that it sees as acceptable to run. They have so far held to the opinion that the word "rejal" in the constitution refers only to men.

 

"Right. 100% democratic"

Now you're lying. I cited the new york times aricles which called Iran an "undemocratic democracy" And from that you assert that I'm saying Iran is 100% democratic? How does that work? 

And I don't understand why you think that the Al-Jazeera article stands in contradiction to the NY Times article I cited. In fact, as the article states, the hardliners were against Rouhani because of his support of the nuclear deal. And it was the other candidate who was seen as closer to the mullahs.

And nothing in that article you cited supports your previous assertion that all the candidates are hand-picked. Obviously they are not.

[hawker9000]

24 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Right. 100% democratic. You've lost your credibility.

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/interactive/2017/05/iran-election-explainer-170503114917157.html

 

The Guardian Council, which is an appointed body, is responsible for vetting all nominees for the presidential election and allowing only those that it sees as acceptable to run. They have so far held to the opinion that the word "rejal" in the constitution refers only to men.

 

Exactly.  'No different than communism in that respect.  Conflating "disrespect for the people" with "disrespect for absolute theocratic rule" is a cheap shyster tactic.  'Something you might hear on CNN or PBS.  It's just a gimmick - don't take it seriously.   Kim Jong Un's thug-loving sympathizers employ the same shtick around here all the time.

 

 

[Srikcir]

57 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Voting in Iran, one is left to imagine, is only for the true believers or for the easily duped, participants in a collective act of dissembling that adds up to nothing.

During the presidential election of 2017 in Iran, It is estimated that the voter turnout rate was about 70%. https://www.statista.com/statistics/692094/iran-voter-turnout-rate/

Iranian women suffrage began in 1963, allowed to stand for and have won public office.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_rights_movement_in_Iran

During the presidential election of 2016 in USA, it is estimated that the voter turnout was about 58%.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/voter-turnout-2016-elections

One is left to "imagine" that Iran has more participatory governance than the democratic US based on elections.

[craigt3365]

11 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

During the presidential election of 2017 in Iran, It is estimated that the voter turnout rate was about 70%. https://www.statista.com/statistics/692094/iran-voter-turnout-rate/

Iranian women suffrage began in 1963, allowed to stand for and have won public office.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_rights_movement_in_Iran

During the presidential election of 2016 in USA, it is estimated that the voter turnout was about 58%.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/voter-turnout-2016-elections

One is left to "imagine" that Iran has more participatory governance than the democratic US based on elections.

Voter turnout means nothing. Didn't they have over 90% in North Korea?  LOL