Neda made me look.Follow

I was contentedly playing away at some fantasy mmo on my computer last night. Hubby is nearby on the couch watching tv. I hear the news announcer begin a story about Neda, the Iranian protester shot dead. Cellphone pics and vidcams record while this woman's life drains away.

The newscaster left no doubt about the graphic content of the news clip - and issued dire warning. I walked over to watch. I was sick to my stomach after. I gained nothing by watching this woman die.

Why did I have to go look?

Yeah, I choose not to watch this kind of stuff either. Just like I've never watched 2girls1cup, or some snuff video, or Kenny torturing his cat. This kind of stuff just doesn't do anything for me.

Having said that, I do find the events in Iran quite fascinating. Seeing all those people protesting and marching for democracy despite the fact they might get killed, immprisoned or tortured is quite inspirational. In France, the secret services "leaked" a memo saying there was no doubt the elections were completely fixed. Ahmedinejad apparently came 3rd, well behind Mousavi.

It's also interesting to see because the split is occuring within the Iranian regime itself. It's not the first time this has happened, but it's certainly the firs time it has happened to such an extent. It has also damaged Ahmedinejad's domestic standing. The confrontational and demonising Ahmedinejad that we see in the West is also starting to show this face domestically. And when you consider that over 60% of Iran's population is under 18, and that most of these people support Mousavi, it's quite uplifting. Finally, it's interesting on a purely theoretical level: Can you combine a theocracy with a democracy? How long can a "revolution" last? Can you contain the media, especially those that are purely user-generated?

Finally, I think Obama has handled all of this brilliantly. The understatement, the restraint he's showed in commenting on this election is exactly what was needed. The guy (or his advisors) clearly has a deep understanding of history and international relations. Very nicely played.

No doubt about it. Not that there ever was, but this just reinforces the point. The worst thing the US could do right now, for itself and for the people of Iran, would get too heavily involved. It would allow the Iranians crazies to claim that all these demonstrations are part of a foreign plot to destabilise Iran. It would take the situation away from being a purely domestic issue to being an international one, with all that this involves.

I'm impressed because criticising Iran's leaders is a sure-fire way to score political points. It doesn't cost anything, and everyone agrees with it. But refusing to do it opens him up to both the right and left-wing, albeit for different reasons. It's brave, and definitely the right thing to do.

And while I like Obama, I'm not an unconditional fan. His swatting of the fly, for example. Way to lose the Buddhist vote, dude.

Haha, I hadn't realised his killing of a fly was controversial! I was just joking when I made the Buddhist comment. Man, some of the stuff people complain about...

Did you see The Colbert Report's Murder in the White House: Death of a Fly segment last week? F*cking hilarious. The best part was Jeff Goldblum coming on and demanding a public apology from Obama for his brutal act of violence against the poor defenseless fly.

[controversy]

An election was held in Iran. Yes. An election. One of those Western Democratic process thingies.

The result that was announced was that Ahmedinajad won. Funnily enough, before the election, all the smart money was on Ahmedinajad to win. The man had developed a cult, as dictators often do, and few in the know predicted anything other than his re-election by a landslide.

The opposition claim it was rigged.

They would, wouldn't they? Mousavi - the main opposition leader is less radical than Ahmedinajad. Read - "nicer than Attila the Hun". High praise indeed

Many of you young'uns may have forgotten the condemnation of Mousavi's appalling regime when he was in charge (don't forget, Ahmedinajad was elected after Iran was declared part of GW Bush's "Axis of Evil").

While in power, Mousavi was routinely accused (by the west) of corruption, oppression, censorship and vote-rigging. Before Ahmedinajad came along, he was demonised as a despotic totalitarian, and with evidence to back that up.

Oddly, while this was until recently reflected in unfavourable online sources (wikipedia showing a startling range of edits in recent months), he is now depicted as farting Chanel No. 5, bringing drowned kittens back to life and rivalling Oprah Winfrey in the sainthood stakes.

1. Q. Do I believe the election was rigged? A. Probably. They always have been since the Shah was deposed in '79
2. Q. Is Ahmedinajad using Basij thugs to suppress opposition? A. Yep. Just as Mousavi did when he held the reins.
3. Q. Do I sympathise with the Iranian people? A. Hell Yes.
4. Q. Is Obama playing this sensibly? A. I think so.
5. Q. Will I be turning my avatar green or my posting location to 'Tehran' as a meaningless token of solidarity? A. FUck off.

I am old and smelly enough to remember the huge support and fundraising in USA and Europe for the brave and noble Taleban when they were fighting those nasty Russians in Afghanistan, and the money, armaments and chemicals we handed willingly to Saddam Hussein when he fought our worthy cause in the Iran/Iraq war.

I fervently believe that the Iranian people are going through the pain of a fundamentalist regime that's setting its sights on provoking the West and/or Israel into military action.

I also believe that the mobilisation of pro-Ahmedinajad fan-bois is no more sinister than the mobilisation of pro-Mousavi protesters. It's political manipulation and I won't get sucked into a do-gooder simplistic assumption that the opposition movement is a force for good.

What pisses me off is that Ahmedinajad only got into power because of Bush's demonisation of Iran. Until the "Axis of Evil" speech, he was nobody. His election campaign was 90% based on his citing Bush's ill-informed venom and it was that, and that alone that raised his profile.

Please, Western Leaders. Don't do it again

[/controversy]


Be careful what you wish for.

Bookmark that Shit.

Nobody told me about the kittens!

I don't know how much of what you said is controversial. I think it's probably a good thing if the foundations of the government there get shaken a bit and, if the election was stolen (I've heard conflicting evidence and conjecture that it was/wasn't) it should be addressed. But I can't imagine any way to interject ourselves for the better in the situation.

I'd like to challenge those who claim Obama is not doing "enough" to plainly state what he should be doing. Glowering and shaking his fist? Sending teams of commandos into Tehran? Launching ICBMs? What would have been an "appropriate" response and how would it be helpful?

In reality, the pundits' & Congresscritters' cries "Obama's not strong enough on Iran!" aren't meant as a suggestion on what to do about Iran. It's just empty invective to try to make our president look bad at home without offering anything to the situation abroad.

Edited, Jun 22nd 2009 2:33pm by Jophiel

I don't quite agree with this. Ahmedinejad had a strong following in the provinces, it's true. But he was also unpopular in the big cities, amongst the youth, the reformists. Most of the stuff that I'd read predicted that the election would at least go a second round, where Ahmedinejad would win. Still, it's worth keeping in mind that election polls in Iran are super unreliable.

I might've been brainwashed by the French secret services, but apparently they rigged the election by *a lot*. As in, much more than before. When the Iranian Clerics first announced the results, it showed that Ahmerdinejad had won easily pretty much everywhere, including solidly pro-Mousavi districts of Teheran, as well as Mousavi's home town. This is incredibly unlikely. Four hours later, these results were taken off. Ahmedinejad predicted he would win with 63% of the votes barely an hour after the polls had closed. Some very dodgy stuff in there.

That Mousavi was corrupt and harsh, no doubt about it. He's no Taliban, but he's no Gorbatchov either. Had he won the election, it wouldn't have changed all that much. When Khatami was in power, things didn't get much better. They didn't get worse either though, in fairness.

I do think there is something genuine, if maybe somewhat naive, about the popular support Mousavi is receiving. The same can't really be said for Ahmedinejad. There's a difference between the students and the Basijs. The opposition might not be a force for good, but they're a force for the slightly better, both for us and for the Iranians, I think. And the current events are probably, in a way, good for the long-term, both in Iran and the region as a whole.

I've watched with interest all the goings on in Iran. It seems that Iran has done more to damage its own reputation and that of the new home of Islam than any foreign power could have hoped to have achieved.

The last time I told this to smash he told me that it didn't matter much when you look at an adorable three year old.

I guess have kids?

You're so cute when you get all French and angsty and existentialist.