Iranian Leader Loses Vote, Reformers Say

[one...two...tree 2,762]

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran's biggest reformist party said on Monday President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had suffered a ``decisive defeat'' in nationwide elections last week due to his government's ``authoritarian and inefficient methods.''

The government's spokesman countered that by saying the government had no favored candidates in Friday's twin votes for local councils and a powerful clerical body known as the Assembly of Experts and was happy to work with the winners.

Political analysts said the elections, the first since Ahmadinejad's stunning 2005 presidential win, would have no immediate impact on policy in the Islamic state where Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has the last word on all matters.

But a poor showing for allies of the anti-Western president could give a stronger voice to more moderate voices in decision-making in future.

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/inter...artner=homepage

[garya505 2]

I think John Kerry should go over there and fix things up for those nice folks.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I think John Kerry should go over there and fix things up for those nice folks.

I'd pick him to go before ....John Bolton, ####### Cheney, Rumsfeld, or any of the PNAC hoodlums that have been running ruining our Foreign Policy.

[almaty 19]

I think John Kerry should go over there and fix things up for those nice folks.

I'd pick him to go before ....John Bolton, ####### Cheney, Rumsfeld, or any of the PNAC hoodlums that have been running ruining our Foreign Policy.

i am with you on that..that bunch on snapperheads did a shitty job

[garya505 2]

I think John Kerry should go over there and fix things up for those nice folks.

I'd pick him to go before ....John Bolton, ####### Cheney, Rumsfeld, or any of the PNAC hoodlums that have been running ruining our Foreign Policy.

That's what I thought, thanks for taking the bait.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think John Kerry should go over there and fix things up for those nice folks.

I'd pick him to go before ....John Bolton, ####### Cheney, Rumsfeld, or any of the PNAC hoodlums that have been running ruining our Foreign Policy.

That's what I thought, thanks for taking the bait.

Kerry's a douchebag, but he hasn't done anything like the amount of damage to this country's domestic and international reputation that the Yahoo! Bush White House has done.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I think John Kerry should go over there and fix things up for those nice folks.

I'd pick him to go before ....John Bolton, ####### Cheney, Rumsfeld, or any of the PNAC hoodlums that have been running ruining our Foreign Policy.

That's what I thought, thanks for taking the bait.

Kerry's a douchebag, but he hasn't done anything like the amount of damage to this country's domestic and international reputation that the Yahoo! Bush White House has done.

And not to take away from that point, but I think these election results are promising, but my hunch that it doesn't bode well for the warmongers who prefer bombs over diplomacy....hence the reference to the PNAC hoodlums who see the U.S. as the righteous and benevolent leader of the free world...even if it must do so by force.

Edited December 19, 2006 by Steven_and_Jinky

[garya505 2]

I think John Kerry should go over there and fix things up for those nice folks.

I'd pick him to go before ....John Bolton, ####### Cheney, Rumsfeld, or any of the PNAC hoodlums that have been running ruining our Foreign Policy.

That's what I thought, thanks for taking the bait.

Kerry's a douchebag, but he hasn't done anything like the amount of damage to this country's domestic and international reputation that the Yahoo! Bush White House has done.

And not to take away from that point, but I think these election results are promising, but my hunch that it doesn't bode well for the warmongers who prefer bombs over diplomacy....hence the reference to the PNAC hoodlums who see the U.S. as the righteous and benevolent leader of the free world...even if it must do so by force.

It's not so much a simple preference of bombs over diplomacy as it is the belief, in a particular case, that bombs are more effective than diplomacy. Sometimes diplomacy doesn't work at all, and force is the only thing that will work. I used to believe (in my young and naive days) that diplomacy was always the way to solve problems and war was always bad. Unfortunately I now know that is not true.

Edited December 19, 2006 by garya505

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It's not so much a simple preference of bombs over diplomacy as it is the belief, in a particular case, that bombs are more effective than diplomacy. Sometimes diplomacy doesn't work at all, and force is the only thing that will work. I used to believe (in my young and naive days) that diplomacy was always the way to solve problems and war was always bad. Unfortunately I now know that is not true.

A lot of people seem to believe that "force" in Iraq isn't working particularly well for us.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I think John Kerry should go over there and fix things up for those nice folks.

I'd pick him to go before ....John Bolton, ####### Cheney, Rumsfeld, or any of the PNAC hoodlums that have been running ruining our Foreign Policy.

That's what I thought, thanks for taking the bait.

Kerry's a douchebag, but he hasn't done anything like the amount of damage to this country's domestic and international reputation that the Yahoo! Bush White House has done.

And not to take away from that point, but I think these election results are promising, but my hunch that it doesn't bode well for the warmongers who prefer bombs over diplomacy....hence the reference to the PNAC hoodlums who see the U.S. as the righteous and benevolent leader of the free world...even if it must do so by force.

It's not so much a simple preference of bombs over diplomacy as it is the belief, in a particular case, that bombs are more effective than diplomacy. Sometimes diplomacy doesn't work at all, and force is the only thing that will work. I used to believe (in my young and naive days) that diplomacy was always the way to solve problems and war was always bad. Unfortunately I now know that is not true.

Diplomacy isn't a tool to bend the arms of countries that don't share our world view of things - it's a way to learn how to live others who don't think like we do in this world.

[garya505 2]

I think John Kerry should go over there and fix things up for those nice folks.

I'd pick him to go before ....John Bolton, ####### Cheney, Rumsfeld, or any of the PNAC hoodlums that have been running ruining our Foreign Policy.

That's what I thought, thanks for taking the bait.

Kerry's a douchebag, but he hasn't done anything like the amount of damage to this country's domestic and international reputation that the Yahoo! Bush White House has done.

And not to take away from that point, but I think these election results are promising, but my hunch that it doesn't bode well for the warmongers who prefer bombs over diplomacy....hence the reference to the PNAC hoodlums who see the U.S. as the righteous and benevolent leader of the free world...even if it must do so by force.

It's not so much a simple preference of bombs over diplomacy as it is the belief, in a particular case, that bombs are more effective than diplomacy. Sometimes diplomacy doesn't work at all, and force is the only thing that will work. I used to believe (in my young and naive days) that diplomacy was always the way to solve problems and war was always bad. Unfortunately I now know that is not true.

Diplomacy isn't a tool to bend the arms of countries that don't share our world view of things - it's a way to learn how to live others who don't think like we do in this world.

Perhaps, unless their world view of things is a world without us in it.