Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So he spoke out against what? People being beaten and killed.
He said nil when it came to showing support for the protester's cries for DEMOCRACY.
You mean this?
As he did over the summer, Obama made clear that the United States' support for the protesters is in spirit and that he considers the unrest to be an internal issue that will work itself out for the better.
"What's taking place within Iran is not about the United States or any other country. It's about the Iranian people and their aspirations for justice and a better life for themselves," Obama said. "We will continue to bear witness to the extraordinary events that are taking place there. And I'm confident that history will be on the side of those who seek justice."
Amnesty International has condemned the Iranian authorities for breaking up an apparently peaceful march held in Tehran in support of Egyptian and Tunisian protests. Protests were also reportedly held in other cities across Iran, such as Esfahan, Shiraz and Kermanshah.
So he spoke out against what? People being beaten and killed.
He said nil when it came to showing support for the protester's cries for DEMOCRACY.
They have a democracy in Iran (at least in name)--the issue is if the elections are fair. We couldn't call for a DEMOCRACY if one is there already--we would have had to call for some type of outside intervention in their elections, or for their leader to step down. See the difference? We could do that in Egypt because of our relationship with the military--we had diplomatic options. We don't have that in Iran.
They have a democracy in Iran (at least in name)--the issue is if the elections are fair. We couldn't call for a DEMOCRACY if one is there already--we would have had to call for some type of outside intervention in their elections, or for their leader to step down. See the difference? We could do that in Egypt because of our relationship with the military--we had diplomatic options. We don't have that in Iran.
The PROTESTERS in Iran were protesting for REAL DEMOCRATIC ELECTIONS....not where only the Mullahs vote on who's going to win a pre-ordained President.
Egypt ALSO had elections...about as Democratic as they were in Iran.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by TnHilltopper
By rolling in 150,000 US soldiers with banners saying "Mission Accomplished"?
That would no doubt be the plan of many of the armchair warriors here, just as long as they don't have to get off their asses and actually do something. Seeing all the benefits bringing 'democracy' to Iraq has brought the US at great expense I think I'll pass Thank You very much.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by KoobleKar
At the very LEAST the same way we showed support for the protesters in Egypt...... if not with stronger and more support.
Oh? You really think telling Ahmanutjob he should step down will be effective?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
