| Author | Message | ||
     Ft_bstrd |
 The largest anti-government rally is scheduled to be held tomorrow in Iran. Millions of opposition protesters plan to take to the streets. The Iranian regime has pulled in tens of thousands of thugs to intimidate, beat, and kill protesters. The government is slowing or stopping all digital links with the outside world so that no one can see what is happening: Iran Disrupts Internet Service Ahead of Protests So if this protest is as bloody as is expected, will it take 72 hours to hear from Obama? | ||
| Buellerandy |
I'd think more along the lines of a week to have his speech g2g | ||
| Reindog |
The Big Guy and Rahmbo will have to conduct a public opinion poll before deciding what to say. | ||
| Spiderman |
But they believe in Allah shouldn't they deserve it? \sarcasm  | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Unlike atheists, I don't really care what they believe as long as they don't plan on blowing up people in my country. I would defend the rights of a group of atheists protesters from being raped, beaten, and murdered as well. | ||
| Spiderman |
glad to hear you say that! (my respect-o-meter of you has moved up yet again, now if You would just like S2s  ) | ||
| Nevrenuf |
he was thinking of liking m2's. haven't heard how that's been lately. | ||
| Crusty |
The largest anti-government rally is scheduled to be held tomorrow in Iran. Millions of opposition protesters plan to take to the streets. The Iranian regime has pulled in tens of thousands of thugs to intimidate, beat, and kill protesters. Hey! Maybe they can kill each other off! It wouldn't bother me in the least. | ||
| Drkside79 |
Not that i disagree with you but what would you propose he do? | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Last time the protests over a kangaroo election where fraud was rampant and the electorate of a democracy were most obviously disenfranchised, Obama's response was nothing. When protesters were being beaten, raped, and murdered, Obama's response was nothing. When Lech Wałęsa and the other leaders of the Polish Solidarity Movement protested against the communist regime of Poland, we supported them. We spoke about them. We promoted them. Why is it so hard to side with those seeking freedom and democracy? Either they are an evil regime hell bent on destroying the United States, or they aren't. They are either repressive, or they aren't. | ||
| 46champ |
No way will he say anything about protesters in Iran by today it takes longer than that to load the teleprompter. | ||
| Mountainstorm |
Well I agree that Iran is a seriously screwed up place. But I disagree that we are World Police. All of the leading nations need to work in concert. Just the US jumping in would do nothing but make things worse for us and probably embroil us in another conflict with no exit plan. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Luckily, it appears that bloodshed has been light. There was at least one death, though. The Iranian regime did get smart. They used paint ball guns to mark protesters and then had forces roaming the streets looking for marked people to arrest and detain. They've learned that it is better to beat, rape, and kill protesters behind closed doors than in the streets where someone might witness it. | ||
| Rocketsprink |
what would you do? Start yet another War? We aren't the police of the frickin' world. We have enough problems here caused by the previous Bozo's. Worse happens in the counties in Africa on a daliy basis, yet no concern for them? Oh yeah. They have nothing we need/want. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Did we invade Poland? You can support the protesters in Iran without adding military involvement. To support the Iranian Regime over those protesting against it is wrong headed and ass backwards. Reagan wouldn't have had a problem picking a side. Neither would Bush senior, Clinton, or GWB. Obama can't seem to pick the good guys from the bad guys. | ||
| Cataract2 |
Why would he? This is what he'd like to do in the US. | ||
| Sifo |
Well I agree that Iran is a seriously screwed up place. But I disagree that we are World Police. All of the leading nations need to work in concert. Just the US jumping in would do nothing but make things worse for us and probably embroil us in another conflict with no exit plan. I thought BO was all about talking with allies and foe alike to apply pressure through unity of political thought. That's how he sold himself when campaigning. Since then he has shown himself to be a ham-fisted inconsistent leader. Somehow I don't see him turning his administrations incompetence now. | ||
| Diablo1 |
Most of you are just so naive and predictable with your sabre rattling. If the goal is to unseat the regime in Iran, the US or any foreign country will have a very tough time doing so by throwing their support to the Iranian opposition parties and demonstrators. What would the US reaction be if the Soviet Union started supporting the tea-baggers in the US and called on them to overthrow our government? The majority of Americans would approve of a government crackdown on the tea-baggers, likely wanting them thrown in jail before trial because they are part of a communist plot to overthrow our democracy with the support of foreign elements. Expect Iran to act the same way toward foreign supported demonstrators. The Mullahs have been in control of Iran since Jimmy Carter was in office. No US president has figured out a good way to get them out of power. Yeah, it's all Obama's fault...and Bush's, and Clinton's, and Bush's, and Reagan's..... | ||
| M2me |
I had just about given up on BadWeb and then I read Diablo1's post. Finally! Somebody else gets it! Announcing that the U.S. supports the Iranian opposition would be the worst possible thing we could do right now. | ||
| Johnnymceldoo |
Worse happens in the counties in Africa on a daliy basis, yet no concern for them? Oh yeah. They have nothing we need/want. You sure about that? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/pop ular-in-africa-bush-has-given-more-aid-than-any-ot her-us-president-783387.html} | ||
| Cityxslicker |
the soviets aint doing anything. they havent been around for the last 20 years. remember that big wall fell and pretty much killed them off. Now maybe hard line Communist nationalists come intervening... maybe even carrying the banner of health care reform.... | ||
| Blake |
When Hamas endorsed the Obama campaign, no one cared. When the Communist party in America endorsed Obama, no one cared. When America makes a statement that it supports all who are fighting for freedom, those who are fighting for freedom absolutely care. It means a LOT to them. It empowers them and gives them tangible aid and comfort. If we are then also helping via covert means to aid their efforts, all the better. Ask the folks in Poland and the Czech Republic. Ask the Iraqi Kurds. Ask the free people of Afghanistan. The President need not state that he is intent on overthrowing anyone or in support of any specific group anywhere. He absolutely needs to state that America supports and will always stand with those whose efforts are on the side of liberty and democratic forms of government. Notice that even in unrelated discussion, the knee jerk reaction of the Socialists is to commence with personal insult against their opposition, "teabaggers." What a miserable way to live. | ||
| 4cammer |
"Notice that even in unrelated discussion, the knee jerk reaction of the Socialists is to commence with personal insult against their opposition, "teabaggers." What a miserable way to live." +1. | ||
| Reepicheep |
Great article today referenced by Drudge... http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnist s/the_president_reality_problem_WMuCZTkNKv10LAtLG9 DLqK What the article missed is that Obama was enabled by the media... While they had a team of PHD's parsing every comma Palin uttered, Obama could make 7 or 8 flat out contradictions in every speech and the only result was reporters with leg tingles. Like having all of last years final exams given to you by a frat brother, this is a nasty little trap to fall into. You don't want to walk away from a slow lob right across the plate in front of you, but then every time you hit that pitch you fail to be honed for the real fast ball that is coming. Then when it does come, it's too late to practice. Perhaps Obama *could* have been a great president. He had a great rapport with the American people, and found a great centrist tone for the campaign. But without a credible media to make him sharpen that edge and balance the rhetoric with the reality sooner, now that the fast pitches are coming, he just stands there like an idiot with that "what the hell was that" expression on his face. I don't know how any candidate could survive that kind of meteoric honeymoon "escort to the top" that Obama got from the media. Its a nasty trap that would be really hard to avoid. I think the media has played a huge part in Obama failing so badly. They are supposed to be virtually a 4th "check and power" for the other three branches of government, and they really screwed the pooch on this one. They never put him in the crucible necessary for him to become a refined and great leader. I doubt we will ever know his real potential, unless he suprises us and takes Palin's advice and yells "do-over!". | ||
| Elsinore74 |
It's all GWB's fault though, right? | ||
| S1eric |
Notice that even in unrelated discussion, the knee jerk reaction of the Socialists is to commence with personal insult against their opposition, "teabaggers." What a miserable way to live. +2 | ||
| Sifo |
Right after he was elected I was talking with my wife about how good of a President BO would make. I made the point that if he did nothing he would probably be seen as a great President. If he would have simply let the natural economic cycle run it's course he would likely have been running for reelection during a strong economic recovery. I see Biden is already giving BO credit for success of the surge in Iraq. This, despite the fact that BO was not only against the surge, but claimed that it would lead to failure in Iraq. Meanwhile things are not going so well in Afghanistan and it took months for BO to finally make the decision to add troops for a surge in Afghanistan. It's just sad that he decided to short the generals on the number of troops that were needed. They seem to be keeping quite about how that's all turning out. Bill you are correct that the media never challenged BO. Also BO stayed away from media that would have challenged him. I have to disagree that his message was centrist though. Just for an example claiming that you are in favor of clean coal technologies followed by claiming that you will bankrupt the coal industry with regulations is not being centrist it is simply being disingenuous. He was simply throwing out multiple ideas in the hopes that people would hear and take away the parts they liked. Bill Clinton was much better at doing that than BO. By comparison BO is an amateur due to not having been honed by years of scrutiny by the media and opposing views of peers. | ||
| P47b |
I have several friends that are Iranian. They all say the same thing. They lost the power to dictators years ago. They want the people to have some freedom again. They idolize the US as a whole. The all say, be glad for your constitution, you need to believe and live by it. Once you lose it any of the first 18 amendments you will have no hope. |
