Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Iran Election

Options
  • 19-05-2017 1:07am
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,378 ✭✭✭


    Tomorrow Iran goes to the polls to elect a new president for the next 4 years. Who will it be and what will the consequences be for Iran and the world?

    No doubt, Hassan Rouhani improved things and has lead Iran in a sensible manner over the last four years. He is a safe pair of hands who has implemented reform and has improved relations.

    On the other hand, Ebrahim Raisi seems to be a dangerous fanatic who wants to bribe the people with false promises of more money. If he was to become president and he is the type of candidate the media state he is, it could spell disaster for Iran. Raisi has designs to be the next Shah as well it seems and some say he is using the presidency as a step to become the next unelected monarch for life.

    The other 2 candidates are minor ones, with one supporting Rouhani. Let's hope Rouhani does win as I think he is the safer bet.

    Sadly, Mohammed Bagher Qalibaf withdrew. I'd trust him before that Raisi guy and he would be a moderate conservative type who could lead the 'principalist' faction in a more pragmatic direction somewhat like Rafsanjani used to do. Handing the whole thing to Raisi who has been compared to the Philippine's Duterte among others is not good for democracy in one of the few Middle East countries that have some limited form of it.

    A Rouhani v Qalibaf contest would be two normal contestants battling it out. A mature and pragmatic contest. Rouhani v Raisi is more like Enda Kenny or Micheal Martin v The Border Fox (Dessie O'Hare) or Michael McKevitt.

    Sadly, a guy like Raisi could win in a year when others unfit for office have taken high office. If he was to win, it would mean either a rigged election or a low turnout. That could spell danger.

    A repeat on a larger scale of the 2009 Green movement could erupt. While Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was divisive, he had support as a man of the poor, a non-cleric who came from a poor family and became president and presented a kick in the face for the establishment, Raisi has none of that. He is firmly a regime insider and from the hardline end of it. He is close to the military junta styled Revolutionary Guards. Unlike Ahmadinejad, he will hardly challenge the present Shah, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei or the Revolutionary Guards he fronts for. Unlike Ahmadinejad, he also was a high ranking and by some reports brutal operative for the regime in the late 1980s.

    What has changed since 2009 also is that while reformers Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Keroubi are still under house arrest (they support Rouhani), Ahmadinejad has also been sidelined as a regime enemy and barred from standing as president. His supporters and he himself will hardly row in behind Raisi if he won. That would mean any rigged election or low turnout win for Raisi would mean that Ahmadinejad supporters and reformists alike would share a common enemy and too much opposition could be something that could finally unseat the unelected junta and its monarch. Sadly, a lot of blood could be shed and another Iraq, Syria or Libya could result.

    Raisi to win would spell disaster and death, and a bloody overthrow of the Islamic Republic of Iran with no guarantee of a better regime replacing it (it may be worse and ISIS may even take over in Sunni areas). A Rouhani win could mean the reformed Islamic Republic of Iran and peace. Let's hope for the latter.


Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,724 ✭✭✭donaghs


    Interesting comparison. Iran holds an election, electing someone who wants to engage more with the Western world. Then President Trump visits and lavishes praise on Saudi Arabia of all places. Castigating Iran for its support of "terrorism" and so on.
    (im aware of the US-Saudi marriage of convenience, but its still so bizarre, especially after 9/11)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,378 ✭✭✭BuilderPlumber


    donaghs wrote: »
    Interesting comparison. Iran holds an election, electing someone who wants to engage more with the Western word. Then President Trump visits and lavishes praise on Saudi Arabia of all places. Castigating Iran for its support of "terrorism" and so on.
    (im aware of the US-Saudi marriage of convenience, but its still so bizarre, especially after 9/11)

    Have to agree 100%. Trump should get wise the goons in his government especially the likes of Steve Bannon, Rex Tillerson, etc. who hold stupid and unhelpful views. Trump himself blows with every wind and he is currently too influenced by these.

    American policy on Saudi Arabia (the world's biggest state sponsor of Islamic terrorism and Islamic extremism inclusive of the world's worst 2 terrorist groups ISIS/ISIL/DAESH and Al Qaeda) has been troublesome. Iran offers an alternative and every Iranian president since 1989 (yes, even Mahmoud Ahmadinejad!) has tried to engage with America and improve relations but idiots in America failed to take advantage of the opportunities.

    It is an insult to the victims of Islamic extremist terrorism that America continues to badmouth Iran and blame them for what Saudi Arabia are really responsible for. Iran is one of the few countries doing anything about ISIS/ISIL/DAESH or whatever you want to call them. This goes largely unthanked. Without Iran, Iraq could be 100% taken over by ISIS forces.

    It is time for America and the West to reevaluate their world relations and to acknowledge the real state sponsors of terrorism. That of course includes America itself: in the 1980s and 1990s, America had no problem arming or encouraging what were essentially what we call Islamists in their fight against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan and later on Saddam's Iraq. America needs to stop supporting terrorist groups and they cannot see what became Taliban and Al Qaeda later would turn against America as well when the USSR/Russia were no longer their priority.

    Saudi Arabia sadly continues to get a blind eye turned to its actions. Even Israel, who are the main target of at least 3 Sunni extremist Saudi-backed outfits, turns a blind eye to the billions pumped into sponsoring anti-Israel terrorism. Saudi Arabia have the Middle East the way they want it: Iran isolated (for now), Iraq in a mess, most of North Africa in a mess and Syria as a place to use up the energy of anyone who may otherwise fight against the House of Saud. Sadly, the whole world is overdependent on the one positive thing that comes out of Saudi Arabia: oil.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 945 ✭✭✭red ears


    donaghs wrote: »
    Interesting comparison. Iran holds an election, electing someone who wants to engage more with the Western world. Then President Trump visits and lavishes praise on Saudi Arabia of all places. Castigating Iran for its support of "terrorism" and so on.
    (im aware of the US-Saudi marriage of convenience, but its still so bizarre, especially after 9/11)

    Its depressing because i suspect Iran can't win. No matter what they do beyond prostrating themselves at the feet of Israel they will be deemed the bad guy.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,378 ✭✭✭BuilderPlumber


    red ears wrote: »
    Its depressing because i suspect Iran can't win. No matter what they do beyond prostrating themselves at the feet of Israel they will be deemed the bad guy.

    Israel and Saudi Arabia can do no wrong in the eyes of the stupid idiots who rule America. Iran and before that Iraq get all the blame. Perhaps, the fact that Iran and Iraq are easy to spell (and still they cannot even pronounce these countries right with their Eye Ran and Eye Raq nonsense) is why they are picked out as the ones America's unintelligent leaders like to bully. Perhaps, Israel and Saudi Arabia would be a tad to difficult for these clowns to spell.

    Trump is 100% a disappointment, another stooge for the same old same old. Anyone who thought of him as going to change things will be sorely disappointed. He is just George W Bush Mark 2 and continuing that imbecilic legacy that has messed up the world. The Republican Party in America is unfit for government and the Democrats are only slightly better. Sad but true. Can America for once have an intelligent government for a change?


Advertisement