Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 6/15/2009 10:02:05 AM EST
What do you want to bet that Barry THE ONE will take credit and state that it was his speech in Cairo that prompted it?
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 10:02:31 AM EST
No such event shall occur.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 10:03:20 AM EST
We don't have to worry. No such thing as a "successful" revolution in Iran, no matter who wins. Mullah's run the show, and will continue to no matter what stooge is in office.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 10:04:31 AM EST
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
We don't have to worry. No such thing as a "successful" revolution in Iran, no matter who wins. Mullah's run the show, and will continue to no matter what stooge is in office.


You weren't alive in '79 were you?
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 10:10:01 AM EST
Considering which side Barry is on....
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 10:11:39 AM EST
[Last Edit: 6/15/2009 10:12:12 AM EST by surveyor3]
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
We don't have to worry. No such thing as a "successful" revolution in Iran, no matter who wins. Mullah's run the show, and will continue to no matter what stooge is in office.


You weren't alive in '79 were you?


No I wasn't. Please explain how the 1979 revolution that brought Iran to where it is now is any indication of there being a successful revolution? The Mullahs chose all the candidates, including Mir Hossein Mousavi. So if the "revolutionaries" get him in, is that a "successful" revolution? Is that even a revolution? Are the Mullahs going away?
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 10:14:28 AM EST
The alternative candidate in this case was not exactly the Shah vs Kolmeni.
He let women speak and radical stuff like that, but he was not exactly going to open Iran to the 19th, let alone the 21st century.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 10:14:47 AM EST
[Last Edit: 6/15/2009 10:18:58 AM EST by AlvinYork]
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
We don't have to worry. No such thing as a "successful" revolution in Iran, no matter who wins. Mullah's run the show, and will continue to no matter what stooge is in office.


You weren't alive in '79 were you?


No I wasn't. Please explain how the 1979 revolution that brought Iran to where it is now is any indication of there being a successful revolution? The Mullahs chose all the candidates, including Mir Hossein Mousavi. So if the "revolutionaries" get him in, is that a "successful" revolution? Is that even a revolution? Are the Mullahs going away?


Some thing tells me that this might possibly be the beginning of the end for current regime, whether or not Mousavi gets in or not. In fact I suspect that Mousavi might not last the week. These protests look like they as large as the ones in 79 and they don't appear to be government driven. The ones in 79 were driven by the jerks now in control of the country.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 10:18:01 AM EST
[Last Edit: 6/15/2009 10:18:36 AM EST by surveyor3]
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
We don't have to worry. No such thing as a "successful" revolution in Iran, no matter who wins. Mullah's run the show, and will continue to no matter what stooge is in office.


You weren't alive in '79 were you?


No I wasn't. Please explain how the 1979 revolution that brought Iran to where it is now is any indication of there being a successful revolution? The Mullahs chose all the candidates, including Mir Hossein Mousavi. So if the "revolutionaries" get him in, is that a "successful" revolution? Is that even a revolution? Are the Mullahs going away?


Some thing tells me that this might possibly be the beginning of the end for current regime, whether or not Mousavi gets in or not. In fact I suspect that Mousavi might not last the week.


Well now that might be the case. If that were to happen, you could see some REAL violence. I guess it couldn't get worse than hock my d nut job, but I still don't see the Mullahs going anywhere. I figure as long as they are around, it'll be more of the same.

It'd be nice if I was wrong and the protesters brought the west to Iran, I just don't see it happening.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 10:20:46 AM EST
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
We don't have to worry. No such thing as a "successful" revolution in Iran, no matter who wins. Mullah's run the show, and will continue to no matter what stooge is in office.


You weren't alive in '79 were you?


No I wasn't. Please explain how the 1979 revolution that brought Iran to where it is now is any indication of there being a successful revolution? The Mullahs chose all the candidates, including Mir Hossein Mousavi. So if the "revolutionaries" get him in, is that a "successful" revolution? Is that even a revolution? Are the Mullahs going away?


Some thing tells me that this might possibly be the beginning of the end for current regime, whether or not Mousavi gets in or not. In fact I suspect that Mousavi might not last the week. These protests look like they as large as the ones in 79 and they don't appear to be government driven. The ones in 79 were driven by the jerks now in control of the country.


They'd have to kill the Mullahs in order to effect regime change, and the military isn't going to let that happen.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 10:20:50 AM EST
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
We don't have to worry. No such thing as a "successful" revolution in Iran, no matter who wins. Mullah's run the show, and will continue to no matter what stooge is in office.


You weren't alive in '79 were you?


No I wasn't. Please explain how the 1979 revolution that brought Iran to where it is now is any indication of there being a successful revolution? The Mullahs chose all the candidates, including Mir Hossein Mousavi. So if the "revolutionaries" get him in, is that a "successful" revolution? Is that even a revolution? Are the Mullahs going away?


Some thing tells me that this might possibly be the beginning of the end for current regime, whether or not Mousavi gets in or not. In fact I suspect that Mousavi might not last the week.


Well now that might be the case. If that were to happen, you could see some REAL violence. I guess it couldn't get worse than hock my d nut job, but I still don't see the Mullahs going anywhere. I figure as long as they are around, it'll be more of the same.

It'd be nice if I was wrong and the protesters brought the west to Iran, I just don't see it happening.


The Mullahs are just a group of men, capable of being overthrown. Nobody thought that the Soviet Union would collapse either.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 10:23:12 AM EST
[Last Edit: 6/15/2009 10:28:16 AM EST by motown_steve]
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
We don't have to worry. No such thing as a "successful" revolution in Iran, no matter who wins. Mullah's run the show, and will continue to no matter what stooge is in office.


You weren't alive in '79 were you?


No I wasn't. Please explain how the 1979 revolution that brought Iran to where it is now is any indication of there being a successful revolution? The Mullahs chose all the candidates, including Mir Hossein Mousavi. So if the "revolutionaries" get him in, is that a "successful" revolution? Is that even a revolution? Are the Mullahs going away?


Some thing tells me that this might possibly be the beginning of the end for current regime, whether or not Mousavi gets in or not. In fact I suspect that Mousavi might not last the week.


Well now that might be the case. If that were to happen, you could see some REAL violence. I guess it couldn't get worse than hock my d nut job, but I still don't see the Mullahs going anywhere. I figure as long as they are around, it'll be more of the same.

It'd be nice if I was wrong and the protesters brought the west to Iran, I just don't see it happening.


The Mullahs are just a group of men, capable of being overthrown. Nobody thought that the Soviet Union would collapse either.


The people with the guns will use them against the people with the sticks in order to protect the people in the sheets.

ETA - The Soviet Union collapsed because the military refused to act against Yeltzen and his supporters. I do not believe for a half second that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard is going to be anywhere near as compassionate.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 10:24:04 AM EST
[Last Edit: 6/15/2009 10:25:02 AM EST by Rattle_Snake]
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
We don't have to worry. No such thing as a "successful" revolution in Iran, no matter who wins. Mullah's run the show, and will continue to no matter what stooge is in office.


You weren't alive in '79 were you?


No I wasn't. Please explain how the 1979 revolution that brought Iran to where it is now is any indication of there being a successful revolution? The Mullahs chose all the candidates, including Mir Hossein Mousavi. So if the "revolutionaries" get him in, is that a "successful" revolution? Is that even a revolution? Are the Mullahs going away?


Some thing tells me that this might possibly be the beginning of the end for current regime, whether or not Mousavi gets in or not. In fact I suspect that Mousavi might not last the week.


Well now that might be the case. If that were to happen, you could see some REAL violence. I guess it couldn't get worse than hock my d nut job, but I still don't see the Mullahs going anywhere. I figure as long as they are around, it'll be more of the same.

It'd be nice if I was wrong and the protesters brought the west to Iran, I just don't see it happening.


The Mullahs are just a group of men, capable of being overthrown. Nobody thought that the Soviet Union would collapse either.

THIS
All men bleed the same. Just takes the right about of blood shed to over throw a government,
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 12:52:00 PM EST
[Last Edit: 6/15/2009 12:55:04 PM EST by AlvinYork]
Originally Posted By motown_steve:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
We don't have to worry. No such thing as a "successful" revolution in Iran, no matter who wins. Mullah's run the show, and will continue to no matter what stooge is in office.


You weren't alive in '79 were you?


No I wasn't. Please explain how the 1979 revolution that brought Iran to where it is now is any indication of there being a successful revolution? The Mullahs chose all the candidates, including Mir Hossein Mousavi. So if the "revolutionaries" get him in, is that a "successful" revolution? Is that even a revolution? Are the Mullahs going away?


Some thing tells me that this might possibly be the beginning of the end for current regime, whether or not Mousavi gets in or not. In fact I suspect that Mousavi might not last the week.


Well now that might be the case. If that were to happen, you could see some REAL violence. I guess it couldn't get worse than hock my d nut job, but I still don't see the Mullahs going anywhere. I figure as long as they are around, it'll be more of the same.

It'd be nice if I was wrong and the protesters brought the west to Iran, I just don't see it happening.


The Mullahs are just a group of men, capable of being overthrown. Nobody thought that the Soviet Union would collapse either.


The people with the guns will use them against the people with the sticks in order to protect the people in the sheets.

ETA - The Soviet Union collapsed because the military refused to act against Yeltzen and his supporters. I do not believe for a half second that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard is going to be anywhere near as compassionate.


Branches & Manpower
Quds Force estimated 2,000 or anywhere from 3,000 to 50,000[6][7][span style='color: blue;']Basij 90,000 full-time, 300,000 reservists, 11,000,000 potential strength (2005 est.)
IRGC Navy 20,000 (2005 est.)
IRGC Air Force (unknown)
IRGC Ground Forces ~125,000 (2005 estimates)[citation needed]

Commander in Chief
Mohammed Ali Jafari

The numbers in blue are the Sepáh e Pásdárán or Iranian Revolutionary Guard. the numbers in blue are the potential or estimated numbers of potential forces, all be it reservists that would be available in a war. One would imagine that they would have military training if they are reservists. If it did hit the fan over there it would be interesting [img]http://www.ar15.com/images/smilies/icon_smile_wink.gif" />
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 12:53:49 PM EST
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
We don't have to worry. No such thing as a "successful" revolution in Iran, no matter who wins. Mullah's run the show, and will continue to no matter what stooge is in office.


You weren't alive in '79 were you?


I was... and he is right, There is no chance of a successful revolution in Iran.

Link Posted: 6/15/2009 12:56:40 PM EST
Originally Posted By Max_Mike:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
We don't have to worry. No such thing as a "successful" revolution in Iran, no matter who wins. Mullah's run the show, and will continue to no matter what stooge is in office.


You weren't alive in '79 were you?


I was... and he is right, There is no chance of a successful revolution in Iran.



That might have been said about going up against Pahlevi and the Savak, but it happened.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 1:00:15 PM EST
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Branches & Manpower
Quds Force estimated 2,000 or anywhere from 3,000 to 50,000[6][7]
Basij 90,000 full-time, 300,000 reservists, 11,000,000 potential strength (2005 est.)[9]
IRGC Navy 20,000 (2005 est.)[10]
IRGC Air Force (unknown)
IRGC Ground Forces ~125,000 (2005 estimates)[citation needed]

Commander in Chief
Mohammed Ali Jafari

The numbers in blue are the Sepáh e Pásdárán or Iranian Revolutionary Guard. the numbers in blue are the potential or estimated numbers of potential forces, all be it reservists that would be available in a war. One would imagine that they would have military training if they are reservists. If it did hit the fan over there it would be interesting


Wishful thinking...

You are dreaming the Mullahs have iron fisted control of the Iranian Military and this situation is not comparable to the Soviet Union… the proper comparison in China 20 years ago… Tiananmen Square.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 1:02:39 PM EST
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By Max_Mike:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
We don't have to worry. No such thing as a "successful" revolution in Iran, no matter who wins. Mullah's run the show, and will continue to no matter what stooge is in office.


You weren't alive in '79 were you?


I was... and he is right, There is no chance of a successful revolution in Iran.



That might have been said about going up against Pahlevi and the Savak, but it happened.


It will not this time.

You do not understand wrong comparison... think China 20 years ago and then you may.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 1:05:15 PM EST
Originally Posted By Rattle_Snake:
THIS
All men bleed the same. Just takes the right about of blood shed to over throw a government,


"Only blood can change the color of history." I've forgotten who said that, one of the Russian revolutionaries in 1905.

Even if the state wins, this could be a Russia 1905 scenario. It seems unlikely that they'll make the fundamental changes that would satisfy the protesters. This violent crackdown is more likely to militarize the opposition movement than to disband it.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 1:05:51 PM EST
[Last Edit: 6/15/2009 1:06:44 PM EST by Frost7]
Originally Posted By Rattle_Snake:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
The Mullahs are just a group of men, capable of being overthrown. Nobody thought that the Soviet Union would collapse either.

THIS
All men bleed the same. Just takes the right about of blood shed to over throw a government,

Key difference:

When push came to shove, in the key moment the Russian military wouldn't kill its own people, and turned its guns on the Party.

The IRG and Artesh are the fuckers who gave children plastic keys to heaven and sent them out to clear minefields and run the Iraqis out of ammunition. Shooting a bunch of pro-Western infidel lovers probably doesn't bother them too much.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 1:07:02 PM EST
I've been known to be a gambling man in a limited sense. I'll take REASONABLE risks for a decent payout.

I would not bet on Iran's "revolution" going one way or the other right now, at any odds. I really do think that it could go just about any direction.

I would not rule out this uprising being crushed. Nor would I rule out this uprising turning into a full-blown revolution and seeing many hardline mullahs
hanging at the end of a rope, and the restoration of genuine freedom in Iran. And I would not rule out anything in between.

You've got a nuclear combination here: Ruthless repression vs. rampaging hostility toward the repressors. Outright fraud by the establishment,
which is obvious to the blind, vs. a huge, angry population that is more than willing to riot, set cities on fire, attack and overwhelm law enforcement,
and actively recruit and encourage others to follow them. Every act of repression enrages the people. That leads to more intense acts of defiance,
and the repressors, desiring above all else to NOT lose control, become ever more ruthless, thus inspiring greater acts of defiance.

If I HAD to bet on this, I'd bet that it spirals out of control to a full blown revolution and it will be bloody, violent, and eventually end with the Iranian
people putting most of their mullahs and ALL of the ruling class on a short rope...a rope with a noose on one end and a tree on the other.

But I wouldn't bet a lot on this.


CJ
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 1:07:32 PM EST
Originally Posted By mcnielsen:
No such event shall occur.


Sadly I think this is the correct answer.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 1:09:10 PM EST
Whats a Mullah?
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 1:10:33 PM EST
Originally Posted By realwar:
Whats a Mullah?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullah
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 1:17:29 PM EST
Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
If I HAD to bet on this, I'd bet that it spirals out of control to a full blown revolution and it will be bloody, violent, and eventually end with the Iranian
people putting most of their mullahs and ALL of the ruling class on a short rope...a rope with a noose on one end and a tree on the other.

What are they going to fight with? They have the military potency of San Francisco attacking Texas. There-in lies the problem with "revolution."

Unless the IRG turn on the mullahs (lol) and Artesh loyalty screening has seriously slacked off the last couple of decades, they're screwed.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 1:27:41 PM EST
The mullahs have a backup plan; they've already abandoned the position that Amahdinejad's victory in the election was due to "divine intervention" and now they claim they are willing to "investigate" the results.

Maybe they will and maybe they won't; but if they do allow the new guy to take over the presidency of Iran; they are going to sit him down first and lay down the law.

On the other hand, if too many Iranians are killed in the current anti government rioting, all bets are off and a full blown revolution is a possibility.

Could an anti mullah faction win?

Who really knows.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 1:51:44 PM EST
What ever happens in Iran, I hope it doesn't spill over into Iraq. We have spent too much blood and money there for Iran to fuck it up.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 1:52:48 PM EST
Even if there's regime change in Iran, it doesn't sound like that the new regime will be necessarily any friendlier to the west than the old one was.

In other words, don't get your hopes up.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 1:59:19 PM EST
People say that this is going to turn out like Tienanmen Square. There is a problem with that line of thinking though. Iran is not Communist China, the people of Iran know what the west lives like, and a lot of them want that. I think many of them would be willing to die for it, especially the women.

Shooting them would only make it worse and anger the people more.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 2:00:18 PM EST

Originally Posted By mcnielsen:
No such event shall occur.

+1
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 2:03:42 PM EST
Originally Posted By Frost7:
Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
If I HAD to bet on this, I'd bet that it spirals out of control to a full blown revolution and it will be bloody, violent, and eventually end with the Iranian
people putting most of their mullahs and ALL of the ruling class on a short rope...a rope with a noose on one end and a tree on the other.

What are they going to fight with? They have the military potency of San Francisco attacking Texas. There-in lies the problem with "revolution."

Unless the IRG turn on the mullahs (lol) and Artesh loyalty screening has seriously slacked off the last couple of decades, they're screwed.


What, you don't think every two bit weapons dealer and European nation won't be selling the Revolutionaries weapons? Hell even our Government would probably sell them a shit ton or stuff, we do it for every other war, it would be stupid not to.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 2:04:59 PM EST
Originally Posted By mcnielsen:
No such event shall occur.


Yep

one side has all the guns.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 2:06:58 PM EST

Originally Posted By Bluewaterheaven:
People say that this is going to turn out like Tienanmen Square. There is a problem with that line of thinking though. Iran is not Communist China, the people of Iran know what the west lives like, and a lot of them want that. I think many of them would be willing to die for it, especially the women.

Shooting them would only make it worse and anger the people more.

All those students in China knew what the West was like, that is why they were protesting in the first place. Their professor that started it told them all about it.

The Iranian military is not a cup cake. They can EASILY put down a unarmed "rebellion". Why would the Mullahs be afraid to use deadly force? They believe God is on their side and they cannot make a wrong decision.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 2:09:53 PM EST
Originally Posted By TheTracker:
Originally Posted By mcnielsen:
No such event shall occur.


Yep

one side has all the guns.


And you can bet that THE ONE has issued standing orders that no assistance is to be rendered, through official channels or otherwise.

Link Posted: 6/15/2009 2:11:15 PM EST
[Last Edit: 6/15/2009 2:14:59 PM EST by Frost7]
Originally Posted By Bluewaterheaven:
People say that this is going to turn out like Tienanmen Square. There is a problem with that line of thinking though. Iran is not Communist China, the people of Iran know what the west lives like, and a lot of them want that. I think many of them would be willing to die for it, especially the women.

.... what?

That is exactly what happened at Tiananmen Square. Pro-western Chinese were willing to stand up and die for what they believed in, and die they did.

Originally Posted By Bluewaterheaven:
Originally Posted By Frost7:
Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
If I HAD to bet on this, I'd bet that it spirals out of control to a full blown revolution and it will be bloody, violent, and eventually end with the Iranian
people putting most of their mullahs and ALL of the ruling class on a short rope...a rope with a noose on one end and a tree on the other.

What are they going to fight with? They have the military potency of San Francisco attacking Texas. There-in lies the problem with "revolution."

Unless the IRG turn on the mullahs (lol) and Artesh loyalty screening has seriously slacked off the last couple of decades, they're screwed.


What, you don't think every two bit weapons dealer and European nation won't be selling the Revolutionaries weapons? Hell even our Government would probably sell them a shit ton or stuff, we do it for every other war, it would be stupid not to.

Oh sure, we'll just start landing C-17s with weapons at Iranian airfields that the Iranian rebels have captured with fists and pistols and somehow won't be attacked by the Iranian air force, and won't start a war in the process.

We're not talking about supplying friendly rebels in Bumfuckistan or Jungleagua here. This is Iran.

In short, if we haven't had people behind the lines stockpiling and planning for exactly this for several years so that a serious resistance can be mounted BEFORE we start supplying them massively, it's not gonna go anywhere.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 2:14:26 PM EST
[Last Edit: 6/15/2009 2:14:48 PM EST by TheTracker]
Originally Posted By Merrell:
Originally Posted By TheTracker:
Originally Posted By mcnielsen:
No such event shall occur.


Yep

one side has all the guns.


And you can bet that THE ONE has issued standing orders that no assistance is to be rendered, through official channels or otherwise.






What a missed opportunity this is.


It should have been ready to go.


I agree ....I'm sure his order is to stand down on everything.






Link Posted: 6/15/2009 2:15:22 PM EST
Originally Posted By Frost7:
Originally Posted By Bluewaterheaven:
People say that this is going to turn out like Tienanmen Square. There is a problem with that line of thinking though. Iran is not Communist China, the people of Iran know what the west lives like, and a lot of them want that. I think many of them would be willing to die for it, especially the women.

.... what?

That is exactly what happened at Tiananmen Square. Pro-western Chinese were willing to stand up and die for what they believed in, and die they did.

Originally Posted By Bluewaterheaven:
Originally Posted By Frost7:
Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
If I HAD to bet on this, I'd bet that it spirals out of control to a full blown revolution and it will be bloody, violent, and eventually end with the Iranian
people putting most of their mullahs and ALL of the ruling class on a short rope...a rope with a noose on one end and a tree on the other.

What are they going to fight with? They have the military potency of San Francisco attacking Texas. There-in lies the problem with "revolution."

Unless the IRG turn on the mullahs (lol) and Artesh loyalty screening has seriously slacked off the last couple of decades, they're screwed.


What, you don't think every two bit weapons dealer and European nation won't be selling the Revolutionaries weapons? Hell even our Government would probably sell them a shit ton or stuff, we do it for every other war, it would be stupid not to.

Oh sure, we'll just start landing C-17s with weapons at Iranian airfields that the Iranian rebels have captured with fists and pistols and somehow won't be attacked by the Iranian air force, and won't start a war in the process.

We're not talking about supplying friendly rebels in Bumfuckistan or Jungleagua here. This is Iran.


What I ment was the People of Iran Have alot of the Things that the West Loves, the Media, etc.... china didn't. And as to Iran.... There are alot of ways to get shit into the country when we are stationed on both sides of it....
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 2:28:00 PM EST
[Last Edit: 6/15/2009 2:29:30 PM EST by Frost7]
Originally Posted By Bluewaterheaven:
Originally Posted By Frost7:
Originally Posted By Bluewaterheaven:
Originally Posted By Frost7:
Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
If I HAD to bet on this, I'd bet that it spirals out of control to a full blown revolution and it will be bloody, violent, and eventually end with the Iranian
people putting most of their mullahs and ALL of the ruling class on a short rope...a rope with a noose on one end and a tree on the other.

What are they going to fight with? They have the military potency of San Francisco attacking Texas. There-in lies the problem with "revolution."

Unless the IRG turn on the mullahs (lol) and Artesh loyalty screening has seriously slacked off the last couple of decades, they're screwed.


What, you don't think every two bit weapons dealer and European nation won't be selling the Revolutionaries weapons? Hell even our Government would probably sell them a shit ton or stuff, we do it for every other war, it would be stupid not to.

Oh sure, we'll just start landing C-17s with weapons at Iranian airfields that the Iranian rebels have captured with fists and pistols and somehow won't be attacked by the Iranian air force, and won't start a war in the process.

We're not talking about supplying friendly rebels in Bumfuckistan or Jungleagua here. This is Iran.


What I ment was the People of Iran Have alot of the Things that the West Loves, the Media, etc.... china didn't. And as to Iran.... There are alot of ways to get shit into the country when we are stationed on both sides of it....

They are going to see us coming a mile away, especially when you consider the amount of stuff we'd have to pour into Iran to get the resistance going seriously would practically require a Tehran Airlift.

Like I said, it's not Bumfuckistan or Jungleagua. It's not even pre-Gulf War II Iraq. It's Iran. They have a fully capable army, air force, and navy. They are GOING to declare war on us if we start airlifting supplies in there, and then we'll really have a mess. Not to mention the whole situation is academic because Obongo is so scared he won't even issue a condemnation for riddling protesters with bullets.

Revolution–successful revolution–in a country like Iran is something that has to be planned for and stockpiled for and organized long before it actually breaks out, or it has zero chance of working unless the military splits down the middle, which is unlikely in the extreme. A big, angry populace means nothing unless it's such a supermajority it can't be suppressed or ignored. It's not. It's a slim majority, and one that has no military punch.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 2:32:56 PM EST
Originally Posted By motown_steve:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
We don't have to worry. No such thing as a "successful" revolution in Iran, no matter who wins. Mullah's run the show, and will continue to no matter what stooge is in office.


You weren't alive in '79 were you?


No I wasn't. Please explain how the 1979 revolution that brought Iran to where it is now is any indication of there being a successful revolution? The Mullahs chose all the candidates, including Mir Hossein Mousavi. So if the "revolutionaries" get him in, is that a "successful" revolution? Is that even a revolution? Are the Mullahs going away?


Some thing tells me that this might possibly be the beginning of the end for current regime, whether or not Mousavi gets in or not. In fact I suspect that Mousavi might not last the week. These protests look like they as large as the ones in 79 and they don't appear to be government driven. The ones in 79 were driven by the jerks now in control of the country.


They'd have to kill the Mullahs in order to effect regime change, and the military Revolutionary Guards isn't aren't going to let that happen.


Fixed.

The regular Iranian military is made up of mostly conscripts that could give two shits about the mullahs. The Revolutionary Guard on the other hand are the regime's protectors and thugs.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 2:33:21 PM EST
Originally Posted By TheTracker:
Originally Posted By Merrell:
Originally Posted By TheTracker:
Originally Posted By mcnielsen:
No such event shall occur.


Yep

one side has all the guns.


And you can bet that THE ONE has issued standing orders that no assistance is to be rendered, through official channels or otherwise.






What a missed opportunity this is.


It should have been ready to go.


I agree ....I'm sure his order is to stand down on everything.








He issued a press statement earlier to this effect. No action on our part - iran must "choose" their own leaders. We won't help - the prisons and torture rooms will be full of protestors soon.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 2:38:49 PM EST
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
We don't have to worry. No such thing as a "successful" revolution in Iran, no matter who wins. Mullah's run the show, and will continue to no matter what stooge is in office.


You weren't alive in '79 were you?


No I wasn't. Please explain how the 1979 revolution that brought Iran to where it is now is any indication of there being a successful revolution? The Mullahs chose all the candidates, including Mir Hossein Mousavi. So if the "revolutionaries" get him in, is that a "successful" revolution? Is that even a revolution? Are the Mullahs going away?


Some thing tells me that this might possibly be the beginning of the end for current regime, whether or not Mousavi gets in or not. In fact I suspect that Mousavi might not last the week. These protests look like they as large as the ones in 79 and they don't appear to be government driven. The ones in 79 were driven by the jerks now in control of the country.


What they don't have is a plan.

You can stomp your feet, scream, and burn everything your neighbors own and it's not going to so much as slow the government down.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 2:43:20 PM EST
[Last Edit: 6/15/2009 2:57:22 PM EST by MK262]
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By Max_Mike:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
We don't have to worry. No such thing as a "successful" revolution in Iran, no matter who wins. Mullah's run the show, and will continue to no matter what stooge is in office.


You weren't alive in '79 were you?


I was... and he is right, There is no chance of a successful revolution in Iran.



That might have been said about going up against Pahlevi and the Savak, but it happened.


The Shah was afraid to use force and fled the country.

The Mullahs know they have no where to run. Who's going to take them in? Russia? China?

They'll make the streets run red with blood and make Tiananmen square look like Romper Room.

And since you mentioned Savak, who were incredibly brutal and evil in their own right, perhaps you should do some reading on Vevak - now leading evil into the 21st century.

Vezarat-e Ettela'at va Amniat-e Keshvar (VEVAK)
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 2:45:25 PM EST
Originally Posted By Merrell:
Originally Posted By TheTracker:
Originally Posted By mcnielsen:
No such event shall occur.


Yep

one side has all the guns.


And you can bet that THE ONE has issued standing orders that no assistance is to be rendered, through official channels or otherwise.



yeah, he'd probably like to see a new caliphate installed in the ME.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 2:45:29 PM EST
Magic 8-ball says: unlikely.

Link Posted: 6/15/2009 3:10:33 PM EST
Originally Posted By Max_Mike:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By Max_Mike:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
We don't have to worry. No such thing as a "successful" revolution in Iran, no matter who wins. Mullah's run the show, and will continue to no matter what stooge is in office.


You weren't alive in '79 were you?


I was... and he is right, There is no chance of a successful revolution in Iran.



That might have been said about going up against Pahlevi and the Savak, but it happened.


It will not this time.

You do not understand wrong comparison... think China 20 years ago and then you may.


Tiananmen Square? That could easily have gone the other way. When that went down the communist party was a lot closer to losing power than they will ever admit. The leadership was seriously divided. There were party cadre among the protesters, there were protests in other parts of the country. There were reports of military units firing on each other.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 3:17:40 PM EST
The first rule of conflict when you're unarmed and your opponent is armed is to regard him as your source of weapons. Your enemy will bring all the weapons to you that
you will need. The trouble is in getting the first few. After that, it's easy.


That technique has been used successfully in every conflict in human history.


CJ
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 4:22:52 PM EST
[Last Edit: 6/15/2009 4:28:25 PM EST by Max_Mike]

Originally Posted By Steve_T_M:
Originally Posted By Max_Mike:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By Max_Mike:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By surveyor3:
We don't have to worry. No such thing as a "successful" revolution in Iran, no matter who wins. Mullah's run the show, and will continue to no matter what stooge is in office.


You weren't alive in '79 were you?


I was... and he is right, There is no chance of a successful revolution in Iran.



That might have been said about going up against Pahlevi and the Savak, but it happened.


It will not this time.

You do not understand wrong comparison... think China 20 years ago and then you may.


Tiananmen Square? That could easily have gone the other way. When that went down the communist party was a lot closer to losing power than they will ever admit. The leadership was seriously divided. There were party cadre among the protesters, there were protests in other parts of the country. There were reports of military units firing on each other.

No it was never a close thing, it had no chance of going the other way. The only question at the time was when would the Party crackdown and how hard. What you fail to grasp is the massive scale of the crackdown and the brutality of it when it came.

What we saw on TV was small scale murder compared to the totality of it.


The peasants in the Chinese Army never flinched in putting it down and they did so with glee, just like the poor peasants in the Iranian Military will.

Link Posted: 6/15/2009 4:30:49 PM EST

Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
The first rule of conflict when you're unarmed and your opponent is armed is to regard him as your source of weapons. Your enemy will bring all the weapons to you that
you will need. The trouble is in getting the first few. After that, it's easy.


That technique has been used successfully in every conflict in human history.


CJ

It has in fact rarely been successfully. Uprisings and revolutions almost never succeed without outside help and usually lots of it.




Link Posted: 6/15/2009 4:34:28 PM EST
Originally Posted By Max_Mike:

Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
The first rule of conflict when you're unarmed and your opponent is armed is to regard him as your source of weapons. Your enemy will bring all the weapons to you that
you will need. The trouble is in getting the first few. After that, it's easy.


That technique has been used successfully in every conflict in human history.


CJ

It has in fact rarely been successfully. Uprisings and revolutions almost never succeed without outside help and usually lots of it.





Yep, including our own.
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 8:54:17 PM EST
Ain't going to happen . The lunatics run the asylum and no way are they going to give up power .
Link Posted: 6/15/2009 8:54:48 PM EST
Ain't going to happen . The lunatics run the asylum and no way are they going to give up power .
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top