Fighting for freedom in Iran in the privacy of their own homes

The old man clasps his hands around his neck, and he groans as his fingers tighten into his flesh – mimicking the constriction of a hangman’s noose – before a wry smile breaks across his face and he gives a chilling laugh.
The macabre, theatrical display is Farshad’s answer to a simple question. The retired engineer has just said what he thinks of Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei – he’s not a fan. But what would happen if he made such pronouncements in public? Farshad fears there would be no mercy.

Five years on from the repression of the Green Movement protests against the 2009 presidential election results, which most experts accept were fixed in favour of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to suppress liberal desires for reform, there have been no more mass demonstrations against Khamenei’s regime.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/fighting-for-freedom-in-iran-in-the-privacy-of-their-own-homes-9834383.html

If you are so critical of the Shi'ia, why do you wish to wage a war against the Sunnis with them?

Quill please grow up, am not going to engage stupidity on nothing I have ever claimed.
Your choice.

I think you are either totally ignorant of the politics of the region, or you have stocks in the munitions industry and just want to stir up shit so you can sell guns and other fun things.

The Shi'ites are predominantly Persians, in southern Iraq and Iran.  They are the ones we set up as the government in Iraq.  They are the one's who wanted us out, and would not extend the accord permitting the US presence beyond 2013.  

ISIL, the ones you want to do war with, are Sunnis, or predominately Arabs, and they wish to fight the Shi'ias.

Now you can come on with all this maudlin sympathy about humane purposes, but this is a civil war.  If you do war with ISIL and the Arabs, you are siding with the Shi'ites and Iranians.  If you decide to go the other way, you will be at war with Persians and Iranians.

That's the way it is, partner.  If you think you can walk into a civil war and save the women and children, you didn't get the memo.

Again I guess you want to act a complete dick, so please continue to act like a child and you will have no response when you make idiotic claims.
The purpose of this thread was to actually show the views of Iranian people, your conceptr that I back either side in a civil war is not only complete stupidity., but shows why you have lost the plot, we are talking about IS who unlike other Sunni groups are trying to wipe out many groups. All others who enegage in violence between each other are wrong but you fail to see what you promote is complete babble as per usual and nothing I have claimed.

You are such a cunnus-brain.  Don't you realize that you are not the one who can write the rules.

The views of the Iranian people are the views of the Shi'ite people.  You think this is some sort of petty squabble that you can settle with a momma-spanking?

ISIL is the cause of the Sunni groups, internal differences aside.  You have no grasp of the plot...what, here you are all in favour of blowing their shit up, and you feel you can tell them what to think?  ISIL is way much closer to that position than you are.  You are walking into a hurricane with a dime store brolly and a pair of tennies.

Original Quill wrote:You are such a cunnus-brain.  Don't you realize that you are not the one who can write the rules.

The views of the Iranian people are the views of the Shi'ite people.  You think this is some sort of petty squabble that you can settle with a momma-spanking?

ISIL is the cause of the Sunni groups, internal differences aside.  You have no grasp of the plot...what, here you are all in favour of blowing their shit up, and you feel you can tell them what to think?  ISIL is way much closer to that position than you are.  You are walking into a hurricane with a dime store brolly and a pair of tennies.

Again you need to grow up you child, you now offer yet again a poor stereotype, where most Sunni and Shia people want peace between themselves and it is n elite within both sides funding violence showing your complete ignorance as per usual.
When you wish to engage in an adult debate let me know otherwise you will you will become more isolated in debates, your choice you left wing pratt.

Brasidas wrote:

Original Quill wrote:You are such a cunnus-brain.  Don't you realize that you are not the one who can write the rules.

The views of the Iranian people are the views of the Shi'ite people.  You think this is some sort of petty squabble that you can settle with a momma-spanking?

ISIL is the cause of the Sunni groups, internal differences aside.  You have no grasp of the plot...what, here you are all in favour of blowing their shit up, and you feel you can tell them what to think?  ISIL is way much closer to that position than you are.  You are walking into a hurricane with a dime store brolly and a pair of tennies.

Again you need to grow up you child, you now offer yet again a poor stereotype, where most Sunni and Shia people want peace between themselves and it is n elite within both sides funding violence showing your complete ignorance as per usual.
When you wish to engage in an adult debate let me know otherwise you will you will become more isolated in debates, your choice you left wing pratt.

You spend so much time and effort talking about me, that I lose sight of what you stand for. Can you explain for me again:


1. "...most Sunni and Shia people want peace between themselves..."

Are you sure? Arabs and Persians don't even speak the same language. Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi, with western backing, has left the Sunnis out of the Iraqi government. Now the Sunnis, led by something called ISIL, is scoring military victories against that government. Yet you say this is, what, coincidence?

2. "n elite within both sides funding violence..."

Oh, this is a new theory. An elite within both sides... Could you explain the parameters of this dual elite theory? Who are the leaders on both sides? What are the goals of each? How do they intend to achieve those goals?

3. If you oppose this, what do you intend to do about it? On which side will you enter the fray? Do you intend to annex any part of the territory of Iraq and The Levant to the British Empire? If not, what is your exit strategy?

First fail when you equate Arabs, who are made up of both Sunni and Shia, so again it shows your failings in understanding the people of the region. We already know in regards to the faults in the Iraq government where again this goes back to my point of those from either side funding persecution and violence. It does not mean all want this though which is again where you fall shorty.
The elite is those with money and some power, it can be both religious and political funny how you even need this to be explained to you.

Your last sentence made no sense as per usual and has nothing to even do with the thread, just you still unable to understand the natural and rational thing to do with a real threat, you eradicate the problem by capture or kill.

Well, let's forget about me.  We were talking about Iran.  Iranians are definitely Shi'ia.

So you were saying that the Shi'ia and the Sunnis have made peace and are now one and the same?

I think the only difference between us is you want to mix it up in their civil war, while I'm saying let them have at it and we'll steer clear of it.  They are going to have their civil war anyway, and there is no reason why you have to go to the dance.

Anyway, we are locked up over here for the next two years. Congress is going nowhere, and it looks like the Republicans have gone Republican. So the US government is flat out of business until February 2017. There will be no authorizations of war powers in the meantime.

Original Quill wrote:Well, let's forget about me.  We were talking about Iran.  Iranians are definitely Shi'ia.

So you were saying that the Shi'ia and the Sunnis have made peace and are now one and the same?

I think the only difference between us is you want to mix it up in their civil war, while I'm saying let them have at it and we'll steer clear of it.  They are going to have their civil war anyway, and there is no reason why you have to go to the dance.

Anyway, we are locked up over here for the next two years.  Congress is going nowhere, and it looks like the Republicans have gone Republican.  So the US government is flat out of business until February 2017.  There will be no authorizations of war powers in the meantime.

Words fail me at how somebody can be so wrong in their assumptions.
I will put it down to the time of year and that you have come down ill

It's not assumptions. You just haven't arrived at the truth yet.

In your humble opinion.

Well, those are your words. Ain't no opinion 'bout that.