Go back
UN-organised referendum in Iran .....

UN-organised referendum in Iran .....

Debates

i

Felicific Forest

Joined
15 Dec 02
Moves
49429
Clock
08 Mar 06
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Would you support a UN-organised referendum in Iran on regime change ?

I would.


Vote here: http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=6118

p

Isle of Skye

Joined
28 Feb 06
Moves
619
Clock
08 Mar 06
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by ivanhoe
Would you support a UN-organised referendum in Iran on regime change ?

I would.
No, because I don't support the UN in principle. Also, how would they manage that? The Iranian government would ensure a 100% turnout and 100% support for their regime (if they allowed the referendum in the first place, that is.)

PP

Belfast

Joined
27 Jan 06
Moves
1809
Clock
08 Mar 06
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by ivanhoe
Would you support a UN-organised referendum in Iran on regime change ?

I would.


Vote here: http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=6118
Absolutely not. What right does the United Nations have to impose elections on a country?

i

Felicific Forest

Joined
15 Dec 02
Moves
49429
Clock
08 Mar 06
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by princeoforange
No, because I don't support the UN in principle. Also, how would they manage that? The Iranian government would ensure a 100% turnout and 100% support for their regime (if they allowed the referendum in the first place, that is.)
It would be UN-organised.

Why don't you support the UN in principle ? What does this mean ?

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
08 Mar 06
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by ivanhoe
Would you support a UN-organised referendum in Iran on regime change ?

I would.


Vote here: http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=6118
What a ridiculous idea!

p

Isle of Skye

Joined
28 Feb 06
Moves
619
Clock
08 Mar 06
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by ivanhoe
It would be UN-organised.

Why don't you support the UN in principle ? What does this mean ?
Well I should rephrase that. I do agree with the principle of preventing war, provided this is not carried too far (like telling a country which has been savagely attacked by terrorists not to retaliate) but the UN are pretty useless at the job. I would agree with a referendum in Iran, or even better a coup, but it's never going to happen, and certainly not via the weak, useless, pathetic, everything else negative, UN.

p

Isle of Skye

Joined
28 Feb 06
Moves
619
Clock
08 Mar 06
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by ivanhoe
It would be UN-organised.
Contradiction in terms.

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
08 Mar 06
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by princeoforange
No, because I don't support the UN in principle. Also, how would they manage that? The Iranian government would ensure a 100% turnout and 100% support for their regime (if they allowed the referendum in the first place, that is.)
Actually they've had two elections in the last couple of years. The Iranian President was elected by a narrow margin last year.

p

Isle of Skye

Joined
28 Feb 06
Moves
619
Clock
08 Mar 06
Vote Up
Vote Down

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
08 Mar 06
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by princeoforange
Well I should rephrase that. I do agree with the principle of preventing war, provided this is not carried too far (like telling a country which has been savagely attacked by terrorists not to retaliate) but the UN are pretty useless at the job. I would agree with a referendum in Iran, or even better a coup, but it's never going to happen, and certainly not via the weak, useless, pathetic, everything else negative, UN.
They had a coup; in 1953 organized by the CIA. They tossed out a leftist, social democrat and put in a dictator. 25 years later that dictator was so hated by his own people, that they turned to Islamic Fundamentalist fanatics in preference to him. The rest, as they say, is history.

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
08 Mar 06
Vote Up
Vote Down

p

Isle of Skye

Joined
28 Feb 06
Moves
619
Clock
08 Mar 06
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by no1marauder
You really don't know what you're talking about.
OK, you are the fountain of knowledge, tell us what really happened.

p

Isle of Skye

Joined
28 Feb 06
Moves
619
Clock
08 Mar 06
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by no1marauder
They had a coup; in 1953 organized by the CIA. They tossed out a leftist, social democrat and put in a dictator. 25 years later that dictator was so hated by his own people, that they turned to Islamic Fundamentalist fanatics in preference to him. The rest, as they say, is history.
The Shah was actually their equivelant of a King, the title was heireditary, no social democracy. They had a coup to overthrow the Shah, now they need another one to overthrow the Ayatollah.

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
08 Mar 06
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by princeoforange
The Shah was actually their equivelant of a King, the title was heireditary, no social democracy. They had a coup to overthrow the Shah, now they need another one to overthrow the Ayatollah.
Your ignorange of history is staggering.

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
08 Mar 06
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by princeoforange
OK, you are the fountain of knowledge, tell us what really happened.
Go to wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_presidential_election%2C_2005

There were seven candidates in the first round; 3 of whom were considered "reformists". About 66% of the registered voters participated, not 100%.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.