Should the world “meddle” in Iran?

iran 3The unrest in Iran shows no sign of letting up. And as the country braces itself for another chaotic day of protests and division, people around the world – diplomats and punters alike – are discussing whether other countries should speak up.On one side you have the Iranian government complaining to foreign ambassadors about what it calls meddlesome, impertinent comments and an intolerable interference in Iran’s internal affairs.

But on the other side, U.S. President Barack Obama is coming under pressure to support the protestors – particularly in light of his recent landmark speech in Cairo. Some bloggers are urging Obama to do more, while others think it’s best to stay out of it.

Opinion also seems divided in some the world’s leading newspapers, with some saying the U.S. must take special care not to be seen as interfering, while others say a hands-off policy is impractical and will not reap dividends.

Is it time to speak up? Or should Iran be left to sort out its own problems? And can commenting on another country’s actions – even with the best intentions – do more diplomatic harm than good?

126 Responses to “Should the world “meddle” in Iran?”

  1. 1 Aboy calledhate
    June 18, 2009 at 10:32

    Heck no, everyone needs to mind their own business. It’s their country let them figure it all out. Seems like every time the US and others stick their nose in they just make things worse and make everyone mad in the end.

  2. 2 deryck/trinidad
    June 18, 2009 at 10:39

    The world shouldn’t meddle in Iran’s internal affairs. We have seen the many wars and bitterness among nation this has brought to the world.

    (which makes all of us fools sometimes)

    So it will be imprudent and impertinent for President Obama to support the protesters or Ahmadinejad until he has all the FACTS.

  3. 3 Rui Silva
    June 18, 2009 at 11:35

    well, i do believe that they need to struggle to get what they want, even if it is against the government, its not up to other countries to go there and try to setup the rules as we have on democratic countries, they are pretty deep on religion believes, which in my opinion blinds people’s eyes from the reality, but this its just my point of view, i just cant force other people to see it this way.
    It would be a terrible risk to force that country to think like we do on democratic countries, I hope that the world leaders wont guide us for another war, in the end its always soldiers and innocent people that die and everything stays pretty much the same.

  4. 4 Ann
    June 18, 2009 at 11:43

    Obama’s cautious approach to events in Iran is a wise move.

    History is littered with the disasterous results of political allegiancies, ideological pacts and so called ‘humanitarian interventions’.

    Leave Iran to sort out it’s own issues.

  5. 5 Abeiku Turkson
    June 18, 2009 at 12:04

    it is even more worrying when president Obama makes veiled statements about meddling.In my honest opinion the world shouldnt at all meddle in the ongoing post-electoral riot.Am not playing the devils advocate here.What the West should do is to tell the opposition to accept the results and allow the tenets of democracy to prevail.After all,the voice of the people isnt necessarily the voice of God.

  6. 6 Ramesh, India
    June 18, 2009 at 12:47

    No not at all. But without any doubt US will be attempting something stupid from behind the scenes. It has already directed Twitter to postpone its temporary shut down for maintenance to allow bloggers from Iran telling the world about the atrocities of the Nejad government!One day Iran will also test nuclear weapons and americans do nothing but shouting just like in the case of North Korea. These american can never change whether it is Bush jr. or Obama at the helm.

  7. 7 Ramesh, India
    June 18, 2009 at 12:53

    If the world has guts, it has to meddle in Burma first. Is the situation in Iran any worse than in Burma?

    • 8 RightPaddock
      June 18, 2009 at 16:31

      India’s next door why doesn’t it interfere in Burma, because it would upset China is why – same goes for the rest of the world.

      If the Anglosphere once again interfered in Iran it would infuriate a lot of people, including many in those countries whose governments don’t like Iran (Egypt, Saudi Arabia etc). Although they are even further removed from democracy than is Iran, so they could easily suppress any unrest, and nobody would say a word.

      However the immediate blowback would likely occur in Iraq, Afghanistan and/or Pakistan which have ancient religious and/or cultural links with Iran (Persia).

  8. 9 umoh, amos (from Nigeria)
    June 18, 2009 at 13:01

    No Nation is an Island in any form.

    What happens in one Country most often than not, has a ripple effect on some other Country somewhere else.
    We ought to be our brother’s keeper and the VERY concern of others should be our VERY concern.

    I AM because WE ARE and WE ARE because I AM.

  9. 10 VictorK
    June 18, 2009 at 13:15

    @ Abeiku – you wrote, ‘In my honest opinion the world shouldnt at all meddle… What the West should do is to tell the opposition to accept the results and allow the tenets of democracy to prevail.’ – In other words, meddle.

    There is no vital Western interest at stake here. The US and UK governments (who also go by the aliases of ‘The West’ and ‘The World’) have hopefully learned a little humility from their disastrous meddling in Iraq and Afghanistan. Western governments should say little & do less about Iran. It’s not their, or our, problem.

    Re commenting on other states’ affairs: many non-Westerners fail to understand two things. Firstly, in a free society the media investigate comment on whatever they please. And, unlike the state-controlled or state-intimidated media that characterise most of the world, the Western media is not part of the government and doesn’t speak the government’s mind. Much of the criticism of Western intervention in Iran is actually directed at the likes of the BBC and the New York Times, on the false assumption that, as in the non-Western world, they are part of the state apparatus; Western governments have actually – and commendably – said very little about Iran.

    • 11 RightPaddock
      June 18, 2009 at 16:18

      @ViktorK I assume you don’t speak or understand French – Sarkozy can’t shut up about Iran.

      Given his antics at the D-Day commemorations I’m in no doubt that he’s doing Obama’s bidding.

      Just as Blair was Bush’s Poodle so it seems that Sarkozy is Obama’s Poodle. Actually Obama’s got 2 Poodles and a Chihuahua – Sarkozy, Merkel & Berlusconi.

      Blair was from the Left and Bush from the Right, whereas Sarkozy. Merkel & Berlusconi are from the Right and Obama’s from the Left – weird eh.

  10. June 18, 2009 at 13:35

    Yes, it’s Tweets versus bullets. The situation in Iran now is very much like China in May ’89, in the run-up to the Tiananmen incident. The leaders have to decide between tanks and liberalisation, and I believe that global citizens can help the Iran opposition to influence their leaders to take the path of democracy.

  11. 13 Jim in Connecticut
    June 18, 2009 at 13:47

    As an American with close Iranian friends, I see the US as falling into a trap if it meddles too obviously. The Iranian regime was beyond blatant in stealing the election. It left so many red flags — finishing the count within hours, astronomical vote totals — that it must have wanted to goad the West . Its theft was too large for stealth, so it did it with trumpets blaring, covered only with the flag. Public Western condemnation will only be used as a club to beat its opponents.

    The West, and the Obama administration in particular, have therefore done well to speak of this only in muted and diplomatic tones. Let us do everything we can to support the majority population of Iran. But let us do so quietly.

    • 14 Tim
      June 19, 2009 at 02:08


      Please let me know where you get your crack, I am stuck at LaGuardia on a weather delay and I want to also be separated from reality. No one’s votes were stolen, you are fixated on alleged wrongdoing that has never been proven by the leftist media who would have loved to prove that the Republicans did something wrong. Find a new conspiracy to rant about, this one has been beaten to death.

  12. 15 Yonas USA
    June 18, 2009 at 13:48

    The west which has unforgiving evil history in southern part of the globe should shutup & stay away. This hippcrit emperial self promoted democracies never peep a word when there was massive vote rigging & fraudlent election in the US in 2000 because those over 80 thousand votes stolen were the African americans. What an irony of this insecure societies never look themselves in a mirror.

  13. 16 Phyllis , Naples Florida
    June 18, 2009 at 13:51

    No, we should just watch what is taking place in Iran and learn from it.


    So far, they seem to be doing a fantastic job of expressing themselves and finding ways to do so.

    Importantly, the expressions are coming from a broad cross section of Iran. All ages, both sexes, different ethnicities, educational and socioeconomic backgrounds.
    They seem to be expressing how the so far ‘SILENT MAJORITY’ in Islamic countries feel.
    A desire to live normal lives – to think, to innovate, to be, – without the distractions of extreme ‘anything’.

    We just need to keep the lines of communication open and let them figure out how to sort this out.

  14. 17 Nanci
    June 18, 2009 at 14:17

    Good grief, since when does HYS care about diplomatic sensibilities when it comes to other human rights issues like Darfur, Sudan, Burma. Should the world have remained quiet when the Buddhist monks in Burma were protesting against the brutal dictatorship there?

    The government of Iran is brutually supressing the voice of its citizens by killing and imprisoning people for peacefully exercising their freedom of speech. No I won’t stand by and watch and stay quiet.

    That said, I think given the US and UK’s history with Iran, they need to just be quiet at the official diplomatic level.

    But it is hypocritical to say that the UN requirement of nation states responsibility to protect one’s citizens’ human rights does not apply in this situation. This responsibility to protect is supposed to trump national sovereignty, so your argument is specious.

    I’m really annoyed with BBC HYS. I participated yesterday and was shocked by the cynicism of presenters like Ros. Students are being imprisoned, beaten and dying and all you can say is that this was a ‘legitimate election’ you should be ashamed!

    • 18 UMOH AMOS (Nigeria)
      June 18, 2009 at 14:48


      Depending on what LEGITIMATE means in this case, various people may have different definitions. However you wouldn’t want to forget that Iran is claiming to practice the Islamic form of democracy, which obviously does not possess the vibrant colors of Western democracy.

      It was a legitimate election as it were (because it followed the rules in their book). The case here is that the legitimacy WAS ABUSED. ROS is only a Presenter (who am sure has his own firm convictions), but WHYS On-Air rules has it that the presenter should stay neutral (only to moderate show) and allow the audience to carry on the debate. SPARE HIM……

      • 19 Nanci
        June 18, 2009 at 15:25


        Sorry, but Ros is a big boy and he likes to stir up controversy. I think he can take care of himself.

        Plus, he was not neutral. He cited a poll published in the WaPo that has been discredited to support his notion that the election results were legitimate.

        I can tell you right now if a similar thing happened here in the UK and Ros thought the electiion results were rigged, he’d be out there on the streets protesting as well.

        A. might have actually won the election, but since they didn’t bother to count the results, but just ad hoc announced that A. won, the election results are discredited.

    • 20 Ramesh, India
      June 18, 2009 at 15:56

      Just wondering whether Ros has really called it a legitimate election. I believe there is no way we could judge such elections staying outside. Ros, can you clarify please?
      My complaint about the protestorss is that they are behaving like they had democracy until now and suddenly Nejad has become a dictator! The whole world knows Iran is under dictatorship for years but not these protestors, it seems!

  15. 21 patti in cape coral
    June 18, 2009 at 14:20

    I don’t think meddling would be a very good idea, nobody really knows exactly what is happening yet. I heard some conservative opinion on the news about how Mr. Obama’s reluctance to meddle was making us appear weak. I can’t understand what they expect the US president to do, nobody can just jump in and act in another country without thinking about it first. Is it a sign of weakness to think about a situation and assess it before you act?

  16. 22 Chedondo, Johannesburg
    June 18, 2009 at 14:44

    The world should keep its out of IRAN if Iran keeps its nose out of the World. Since Iran is a member of the UN (and may even occupy one of the rotating sits on the Security Council) where matters of good governance and transparency are often discussed, the world has a right to have more than a passing interest in how it conducts its elections.

  17. 23 Steve in Boston
    June 18, 2009 at 14:51

    As far as the US is concerned, we have no dog in this fight, so we should stay out of it.

    Every time we go to help someone they eventually turn around and kick us in the pants. I’m sick and tired of it.

    We’re already getting blamed for this situation already and we haven’t done a danged thing. Let the Iranians settle this one themselves.

    If the rest of the “world” wants to meddle, they have my blessing. We’ll sit back and watch this one from the sidelines.

    • 24 Ramesh, India
      June 18, 2009 at 17:23

      @Steve, Good learning from history! But your words sound like we wont meddle in any other countries except in those we are already in? May be Iran is already in the list of states sponsoring terrorism. Else Hillary would have threatened to do so just like in the case of North Korea. Only Hillary may know the relation between nuclear tests and terrorism!

    • 25 John LaGrua/New York
      June 18, 2009 at 18:51

      Ross; Iraq ; Hundreds of thousands of ninnocent Iraqi’s dead AND A COUNTRYDESTROYED by a war initiated on lies by the Bush crowd and you dismiss that as nothing ..US support, one hundred fifty billion dollars , to Isreal in crushing the Palestinians over 60 years ,Nothing ! US policy in thr Mid East brought us 9/11 as retaliation and the hatred of the Muslim world ,Nothing .Take off your blind fold and put the pin on the donkeys tail.Your right on one thing the US should not meddle in Iran’s legitimate internal affairs.

      June 18, 2009 at 19:05

      Thanks Steve in Boston, it seems true that the US is getting all the flack from these elections as if it is another constituency of Iran. Some even in your country have even dared your president to front himself as a punching bag. Where is the so called the international community?

      He should stick to the pertinent issues he clearly perceives exist between the world versus Iran and not attempt to melt into the crowds of Tehran. The most important question is about peace in the Middle East which alone can give the world a sigh of relief. This too is the only issue which can disarm the already dangerously armed planet so that we can talk usual business. At the moment we are all getting held hostage by the stage managed tunes of political Mandarins across world capitals.

  18. 27 clarence mcmullen
    June 18, 2009 at 15:05

    It is the arrogance, greed for goods and power and the self righteousness of the west which is responsible for the problems in the world. No nation has the right to meddle in the business of other nation. Maturity comes by letting people deal with their issues and deal with the consequences both good and bad.. The Iranian society traditionally has been one of the most civilised and mature society. It is quite capable of dealing with its problems and learn from them.

    June 18, 2009 at 15:13

    Obama is wise to ignore going along this path and distancing himself from the hawks.

    The Iranian opposition could be hoping to get him on board thereby endorsing their credibility. For one thing, some Iranians were looking for their own Obama like the US in this election. The other thing he should note is that, most Muslims regard him as their own. It might aslo be playing in their mind that this is one way of sucking him into Muslim politics. This would reduce his status to that of another hecler from the White House.

    In my mind, He needs to take this move away from squabling in order to gain a firm footing on the thorny issues of nuclear and peace in the region. These will ony work well in a climate of mutual respect.

    In addition, the west must have wanted to rubber stamp this election as undemocratic. I think they have achieved their dirty objective and should now shut up so that we can move forward to the real issues.

  20. June 18, 2009 at 15:14

    Iran should left to the Iranians. There is little the world can do as long as the regime abides by international law. In other words, it’s not the world that should elect an Iranian president.

    Actually, there are many controversially elected presidents (like Zimbabwe’s president Mugabe) who are still in power although they are unpopular at home and abroad. There is little meddling of the international community, except for sanctions which doing more harm to the peoples than to the regimes.

    When it comes to meddling to Iran, I suspect there is one country that will be more than happy to do so- namely Israel. Its wishful thinking is to intervene in Iran with missiles to destroy its nuclear facilities. After that, it doesn’t care who is ruling Iran as long as they remain toothless and without a tongue that repeat the call for its destruction.

  21. 30 Tamatoa
    June 18, 2009 at 15:19

    No nation has the right to intervene. It doesn’t make sense to say anything about the elections on either an official or inofficial on a diplomatic level.
    What I would do is guide and support the media. If they can stay within the boundries of law and stick to the truth I would ecourage them to publish as much information as they can. Getting in contact with opposition leaders and support them with public outside information.
    If the elections were manipulated and it can be proven then Iran loses its credibility. After that, the pressure mounts until the Iran gravely violates its citizens human rights. Only then is it legitimate to act on a diplomatic level.

  22. 31 Muthee in Nairobi
    June 18, 2009 at 15:22

    Hi WHYS,
    I heard on the BBC World Service last night Mr. John Bolton saying something to the effect that “No Drama Obama” should do more because at the moment he is making the United States look so weak and helpless.
    But pray, who is Obama to Iran? And who is any outsider especially Westerner to Iran?
    For starters, we have all had a convoluted view of Mr. Ahmadinejad using the political power play he engages everyone in on the international stage as a yardstick. But we pathetically know so little about the dynamics of internal Iranian politics. In the run-up to the general elections last week, the media {read international media} used the fact that we know nothing about Iranian politics to hype and shape world opinion of the main political foes in the elections. With no prizes for guessing, Mir Hossein Mousavi was portrayed as a very popular politician with thousands of people attending his rallies and the notion that he could not lose the election was embedded in the minds of outsiders.
    But it is my belief that the reality on the ground was quite different. The educated class and young people hungry for the libertarian lifestyle of the west are hogging up all the headlines with their protests, with nothing told about the millions more conservative and largely uneducated populace {that don’t know what is Twitter} that overwhelmingly support the theocracy there.

    Now to your question, my opinion is that NO! no one should meddle. in fact if truth be told, the question between the lines reads “should the international community rise in support of Mr Mousavi and his protesters?”

    • 32 Ramesh, India
      June 18, 2009 at 17:29

      Well, there is nothing wrong, especially in western democracies, to openly say about their preference in the results of elections in a particular country. For example, Tony Blair openly said he would prefer Democrats when Bush junior contested for his first term in office.

  23. 33 John in Salem
    June 18, 2009 at 15:33

    No, we shouldn’t, but those who don’t like the U.S., including some on this blog, will blame us anyway no matter what we do or don’t do.
    What they should understand is that constantly accusing us of every ill in the world will only get them ignored. It’s like using the words “never” and “always” in an argument – it’s just emotional extremism that does nothing to help solve the problem.

    The truth is that the people of Iran have overthrown governments in the past when they needed to and they’re fully capable of doing so again without support or encouragement from anyone else.

    • 34 patti in cape coral
      June 18, 2009 at 15:53

      @ John – Thank you, I wanted to say the same thing, but couldn’t figure out how to say it in a more polite and logical way, as you did.

  24. 35 Andrew in Australia
    June 18, 2009 at 15:46

    Let the Iranians sort this out for themselves. They are not a backward or inept nation or peoples and as such have the right to determine for themselves the outcome of this present situation. Secondly to intervene other than on a diplomatic level, more directly will be seen by the Iranians as an outside intervention too far. The protestors may say the west should help more, but other than reporting what is occurring the west should firmly keep itself to itself and allow those who are directly involved and who it directly affects be the ones who determine what happens, how it happens and when it happens. Internal politics are not the plaything of complacent and comfortable external modern nation states. This is not a humanitarian crisis of hunger or housing nor is it a natural disaster. The Iranians must sort this out themselves.

    June 18, 2009 at 15:48

    Is there something we may call too much democracy or too much government? If such a situation exists either of the above, is it a legitimate situation?

    My reason for asking thes question stems from the fact that no one can now say that we have focused politics in this world anymore. So many unco-ordinated mouthing from NGOs, pressure groups, ethinic groups and self appointed think tanks are getting in the way of genuine policy shapers. Who is talking on behalf of the west or Iranian state and who should we follow. It is becoming confusing and we need to be cautious.

    Look at the west and do not ignore Iran too. They are all seeking for focused leadership. In the west, Obama is interefered with and in Iran itself, you cannot ignore that there exists some side kicks whose motive we do not know.

  26. 37 RightPaddock
    June 18, 2009 at 15:52

    The Iranian people have a long record of running their own affairs, much longer than the recorded histories of the USA, the UK and just about everywhere else.

    The last time the Anglosphere directly interfered in Iran was in 1953 via Operation Ajax (a joint CIA/MI6 operation), the elected prime minister Mohammed Mosaddeq was kicked out and replaced by the unelected Shah and his CIA/MI6 trained KGB-like secret police known as the Savak.

    An unintentioned consequence (“blowback”) of Operation Ajax was that Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini flew in from Paris in 1979 to proclaim the Iranian Islamic Revolution, but only after the people had effectively overthrown the Shah.

    I suggest that the Anglosphere keeps its nose out and lets the Iranians determine their own future, otherwise they, the Anglosphere, will suffer yet another unintended consequence.

    Perhaps because of their sense of thir own long history the average Iranian seems to take a long term view on events than many “westerners” who often appear to have the attention span of a Colorado potato beetle.

    • 38 patti in cape coral
      June 18, 2009 at 16:12

      I couldn’t find any information on the attention span of the Colorado potato beetle, but I’m assuming that when most bloggers mention “westerners” they mean US, UK, maybe a little of Europe?

      • 39 RightPaddock
        June 18, 2009 at 16:42

        @patti in cape coral – you cant find info re the beetles attention span because it’s so small that its yet to be measured.

  27. 40 M
    June 18, 2009 at 16:11

    Hi all!
    This is an Iranian youth who is not in Iran but is checking the news on his country very carefully. As far as I know my government, they are very sensative against other country’s interference in the internal affairs. Sometimes even they use this notion as a means to even further limit the people in Iran by saying that those people who are protesting are en-dangering the governbment and are following the strangers (foreigners!). Although I believe this is not vtrue, but I think it is wise for other countries and international bodies to takle this into consideration and try to somehow manage their “meddle” in Iran’s case.
    The thing is that people in Iran who are protesting for their right hope to have their voices heard, however on the other hand, the government may use any such meddleing as a means to increase its limitation on people and suprress and more severely punish people.

  28. 41 Ibrahim in UK
    June 18, 2009 at 16:14

    Countries only meddle abroad to further their own national/capitalist interests, usually at the expense of the other country
    The US and UK have a history of meddling in Iran. In operation Ajax they overthrew the democratically elected leader of Iran and replaced him with a pro-West dictatorship. The people eventually revolted (and brought about this regime).
    It is up to the people of Iran to bring about the changes they want and choose the path they want to follow.

  29. June 18, 2009 at 16:41

    No..No..Let the Iranians sort themselves out. I don’t know but don’t these leaders have consciences – like dont they think ,”maybe what i am doing is not right? mabe very wrong?”.
    Iranians should be allowed to fight for their country and hold their leaders accountable – its not our job.

  30. June 18, 2009 at 16:42

    I have seen enough of responsibility demonstrated by the Iranians. with their pace, the world meddle or not; Iranians are wise enough to interprete Democracy to the core, They are Law abiding enough to be obeying who they believe in, They have been violent enough to sustain resistance against an imposition by their once Hero king. the global soceity should just watch.

    Iranians are not Negerians who can not separate their destinies from an imposed OBASANJO and FRIENDS dynasty.

    Democracy in their own hands…..I am sure they can handle it with a good grip

  31. 44 stephen
    June 18, 2009 at 16:45

    I applaud the Obama administration in being very candid in the current Election in Iran.The Leaders in Tehran cant accuse the west of meddling, And trying to manipulate their affairs for political gain. This is the right thing to do.

  32. 45 Julia in Portland
    June 18, 2009 at 17:01

    @John in Salem

    Well said!

  33. June 18, 2009 at 17:02

    I do not think it is proper for countries to meddle in the affairs of others. Iranians should be left alone to sort themselves out.

  34. 47 rob z.
    June 18, 2009 at 17:04

    I believe that change in Iran should be supported,but only in a way that will not put people in harms way. Western governments should aviod any kind of subversive or clandestine operations against the Iranian leadership.
    Only if there is a clear humanitarian crisis,shuold there be any action by any outside force to end such problem.
    The Iranian leadrship does realize that a peaceful solution is in the best intrest of all;and it is in our intrest to that stability is maintained in the area.
    Change will come to Iran,we in the don’t need to force it.
    Rob in Florida.

  35. 48 Peter_scliu
    June 18, 2009 at 17:05

    Not only Iran . China , Myanmar , Sudan , Zimbawe and anywhere else. When the west meddle in other people affairs , the oppressed won’t do anything to help themselves.

  36. 49 Denny Kazembe
    June 18, 2009 at 17:10

    Sure let the world pick and choose. The world was idle while people died in Kenyas elections, the world was idle while people died in Zimbabwe elections. Now you say what? Why Iran? I believe Iran is capable to solve its own problems. Do not take advantage of this cituation to excert other motives. We all know the real issue about Iran. Just say, is this not the chance to go to iran and do what we wanted to do all along!!!

  37. 50 Chrissy in Portland
    June 18, 2009 at 17:23

    I do not believe it’s the job of the United States to “police” the world, but I also don’t believe we should turn a blind eye if acts of brutality are committed against the Iranian people. Yesterday, there were several news reports that the Iranian government is threatening that protesters could face prosecution and even execution for “incitement.”

    My question is:

    If the Iranian government follows through with the threat of executing for “incitement” should the US and the international community get involved or should we sit back and do nothing?

  38. 51 brinda,India
    June 18, 2009 at 17:26

    The people of Iran seem to know what they want and are fighting for it,, so let us keep our openions ot ourselfs and let them do what is best for their country.Unlike somecountries where the citizens themselves have given up taking initiatives Iranian are so alive and active. My best wishes to them .

    Waht ever the out come we know that is a country that has some fight in it.
    Bravo to The Iranians.

  39. June 18, 2009 at 17:32

    Obama, is wise to remind us and the world that we do not want to be seen as an outside meddeling interest.

    The Iranians need to take care of their own situation, just like any other truly independant nation has done with itself. The direction, the roots, the culture always ends up being stronger and more valid that way.

    What the people of Iran need to know is that there are a lot of Americans and Western nations that are very interested in what all comes of all this. Either the young people have the will for freedom and the persuit of a decent direction or they are not yet ready to be anything except pawns of a rather dictatorial 6th century mentality. The American Hope is that the majority of the Iranian people are wise and devoted enough to make a stand that demands the dictators use common sense and revert to the wisdom of the young masses……not the dead, smart, conservative thinking that was acceptable for a while in the first Iranian revolution in 1979.


    oregon coast

    • 53 Ramesh, India
      June 18, 2009 at 17:50

      well it looks like Obama talks something and practice something else. What made the american govt to ask Twitter to postpone it temporary shutdown? What they would like to do if the iranian tweeters start sending information about much worse atrocities allegedly commited by Nejad govt? Would Obama act differently in such a case? And why would american has to monitor the tweets coming out of Iran??

  40. 54 Tom D Ford
    June 18, 2009 at 17:41

    @ Muthee in Nairobi
    June 18, 2009 at 15:22

    “Hi WHYS,
    I heard on the BBC World Service last night Mr. John Bolton saying something to the effect that “No Drama Obama” should do more because at the moment he is making the United States look so weak and helpless. …”

    John Bolton is the Far Right Conservative nutcase who is so wacko that the Senate would not confirm him, so Bush had to make a recess appointment to get him in as US Representative to the UN.

    Now, it is supremely and hypocritically ironic that John Bolton wants Obama to interfere, when traditionally Conservatives are against interfering in other nations affairs.

    And the additional irony is that Bolton is anti-the United Nations, which is really the only body which as representative of the Peoples of the World would possibly have any right to ask Iran to be open and honest about the recent election.

    So that leaves the question, “should the UN “meddle” in Iran”,? And the answer, since Universally recognized Human Rights are involved, is yes, the UN ought to do what it can to request that Iran be open and honest about the election.

    But the UN has very little power to protect Human Rights because US Conservatives keep it from doing so by not funding it and by vetoing any requests for help.

  41. 55 Andre Pinto
    June 18, 2009 at 17:58

    Absolutely not! The US always mess things up when they put their nose. Take a look at the Oil war and you will figre out what I’m talking about.

  42. 56 Joseph A. Migliore
    June 18, 2009 at 18:02

    I agree with my President’s position on commenting on Iran’s recent election results. Obama, has made it clear, any official public comment, would be perceived as “meddling in Iranian internal affairs.” People fail to realize, that Iran is an Islamic Republic, obviously the West would have preferred Mousavi’s more moderate approach — but fundamentally, it remains for the Iranians to decide.

    The U.S. most notibly, has already meddled in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, North Korea, where will this end? The meddling has lead to countless, civilian casualties, displaced people and mayhem for many in those countries.

    We must refrain from public commenting or meddling with respect to Iranian elections — I do support the green movement, but Iran must decide.

  43. 57 Andrew in Australia
    June 18, 2009 at 18:04

    I realise that the world loses interest quickly and that many around the world still actively struggle to keep the issue alive, but compare for a moment the media storm around the Iranian election and the alleged vote rigging to the actual denial of Burmese premiership to Suu Kyi who had won that election coming some 20 years ago.

  44. 58 Anthony
    June 18, 2009 at 18:04

    Yes, the U.S. should place harsh sanctions, set up missle bases on the Iraq/Iran border, and water board people into confessing there is a connection between Ahmadinejad and Bin Laden…oh wait, Bush/Cheney/Runsfeld are out, I forgot.

    So NO!!!, the U.S. has already gotten in enough trouble “policing” the world.

    -Anthony, LA, CA

    • 59 Lynn
      June 18, 2009 at 21:31

      I am glad to see that many here are of the opinion that President Obama has taken a wise stand on this issue. I like Anthony’s humor; short, satirical and right on target.

      I can’t help thinking what would have happened had Iran or any other country meddled in our political process when Bush stoled the election or interfered in any number of sociopolitical clashes that have occurred here in the past.

      At this point in time, it is good that the Leaders and the people of the World are watching closely to what is unfolding in Iran. But barging in at this point will only skew what happens next and cause the dictators and tyrants of this world to have more reason to hate America. If actions are appropriate, I say let the U.N. do the job they are suppose to do; and for those who think the US isn’t doing enough, they should prod their own leaders into action.

  45. 60 Archibald
    June 18, 2009 at 18:08

    I find it quite hard to believe that there is no “meddling” going on in Iranian politics from outside forces, though all claim hands off innocence. One need only look back to 1970’s Iran and all the “hands off” support it received from the CIA to see a more than likely blueprint for what has yet to transpire……… Human nature and entrenched gov’t thinking being what it is.

  46. 61 Vijay
    June 18, 2009 at 18:11

    Should the world “meddle”in Iran?

    By all means “meddle” in Iran if deemed necessary but there would be a cost associated with it vis a vis regional stability,combined with Russias return to their Cold War game,the world economic crisis(no money),war weariness in the USA and UK(no will) therefore th UN would be the most appropriate forum to calmly address this issue.

    I wander who controls the Billion dollar drug trade through Iran,normally when there is civil unrest, criminals (and their allies)try to take advantage of the situation(may be they engineered the whole thing,they had the money ,manpower and network organisation)

  47. 62 steve
    June 18, 2009 at 18:14

    Iran is the prime example of why church and state should be separated.

  48. June 18, 2009 at 18:19

    Of course the world should speak out against the Iranian government. The pro-reform protesters are fed up of the oppression that is imposed on them in the name of Islam. They have rose up to fight for their freedom, and we should stand with them.

    Iran’s accusations of interference should be disregarded. The Iranian people are not so stupid, that they cannot tell who is organising the protests they are participating. Having support from outside the country is a good thing, it shows that the protesters are fighting for things we take for granted. We should be more supportive of the pro-reform protesters, and condemn the Iranian government more strongly.

  49. 64 Julia in Portland
    June 18, 2009 at 18:20

    I believe that the US can have an opinion regarding what is going on in Iran……..but should limit it to just that, we should not throw money, arms, CIA covert actions or anything else at this conflict.

    We’ve interfered in Iran’s government since the 1950’s ( If I understand correctly that CIA action was one of the first times the US interfered in another countries government). We need to stop this trend.

    Opinion – Yes
    Interference – No

  50. 65 Bruno
    June 18, 2009 at 18:25

    the US should absolutely stay out of this one. Obama is doing just that and I applaude.

    Anything Obama could say in support of the uprising, will end as welcome ammunitions for Ahmadinejad to quel it. In fact I believe he is absolutely craving or any such statments.
    What Mc Cain is advocating is just the absolute worse thing to do at this time.

  51. 66 Ryan in Atlanta
    June 18, 2009 at 18:29

    From a practical standpoint, it would not make much sense for the world to interfere in Iran’s domestic politics. The results of the election are unlikely to be over-turned no matter how illegitimate they may or may not be, and Mousavi is not even guaranteed to be more accommodating to the West than Ahmadinejad.

  52. 67 Majid
    June 18, 2009 at 18:29

    “Absolutely not”! Just somehow manage to video-broadcast the brutality of the militia against the protestors … that alone should be enough to gradually undermine the establishment.

  53. 68 Rachna Patel
    June 18, 2009 at 18:32

    I look at this as a double standard. During the Bush-Gore Elections American popular vote was with Gore and we all know the court case that followed. I think everyone will agree that Gore was thought to win without a doubt. When this didnt happen, although there was no revolution in America against this, I do not remember any outside intervention.
    Agreed that UN is a paralysed entity when it comes to such meddling and for some reason US is expected to put their foot down but look whats happened in Afghanistan. Millions of $$$ are being spent to keep the country afloat.
    Think about the consequences if a country intervenes with Iran. Don’t you think we will be giving birth to a lot of western world haters just be going in to help their own people? These are the long term consequences we ought to think about.

  54. 69 Kurt From Oregon
    June 18, 2009 at 18:33

    Correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t the “president” of Iran just a puppet of the supreme leader? If so does it really matter who holds the office? I understand that the people want their voices heard and democracy to work and all that, but isn’t it kind of a moot point?

  55. 70 Alison in Oregon
    June 18, 2009 at 18:35

    How can we have a discussion about the stolen election in Iran without mentioning the two stolen elections in the US? The primary difference seems to be that the Iranian people are more serious about democracy than we Americans.

  56. 71 steve
    June 18, 2009 at 18:36

    So telling America to shut up is what people like?

    Do you love him more for his holocaust denial as well?

  57. 72 Garth
    June 18, 2009 at 18:38

    Meddle away!

    Iran has been there forever, and is obviously hugely successful.

    Maybe by meddling, some of the good stuff they do will rub off on us?

  58. 73 steve
    June 18, 2009 at 18:39

    Can you really blame Iran’s hostility to the US on Bush? If you’ll notice, the Iranian revolution took place during Carter’s Presidency, the hostages were taken on Carter’s watch, and they were released the very day Ronald Reagan was inaugurated. They seemed to hate us with Carter, an extreme liberal, in power. I seem to recall them shouting “Death to America” when Carter was still in power. Are you sure the Bush bashing is accurate in this case?

  59. June 18, 2009 at 18:41

    The people of Iran are humans and should get all the outside help they ask for to ensure human rights are upheld. Being born to any country does not mean we agree with all that happens there.

    Even if it is one person, once the people ask and when in such large numbers the world should respond. Otherwise the likes of very bad things can happen. The world should always be available to assist when asked.

    The world can objectively speak its position on any matter and at anytime.

  60. 75 John
    June 18, 2009 at 18:43

    The Neocons/Israeli Lobby/BBC continue their effort to foment military action against Iran, with absolutely no evidence of any fraudulent manipulation of the election results. The one poll conducted before the election by a Western organization that was transparent about its methodology — a telephone poll carried out by the Washington-based Terror-Free Tomorrow from May 11 to 20 — found Ahmadinejad running 20 points ahead of Mousavi. This poll was conducted before the televised debates in which Ahmadinejad was perceived to have done well while Mousavi did poorly.

    When was the last time Saudi Arabia had a free election? China? Libya? The list goes on.

  61. 76 Peter_scliu
    June 18, 2009 at 18:44

    The entire world order is wrong. In countries who wants to be a member of a world organisation must subscribe to a standard that will entitle them the privileges that will help their country to be prosperous , stable and secure. To be a member of such an organisation these countries must be accountable for the human rights and signed up to the International courts. No countries can be exempted and no countries can have veto power. Like a big European Union. Then foreign interference is ok.

  62. 77 Tom D Ford
    June 18, 2009 at 18:48

    @ Julia in Portland
    June 18, 2009 at 18:20

    “… We’ve interfered in Iran’s government since the 1950’s ( If I understand correctly that CIA action was one of the first times the US interfered in another countries government). We need to stop this trend.”

    I encourage you to read “A Peoples History of The United States” by Howard Zinn, and search out the essay by US Marine Major General Smedly Butler, “War is a Racket”, to find out how often and why the US has interfered in other Nations governments.

    I’d also recommend ‘The Prize” by Daniel Yergin, either in book or documentary form which is the history of Oil and the wars fought for it and the interferences in other governments.

    Also the history of the “banana republics” in South America, well there seems to be no end to the history of US interference in other nations affairs.

    But all that said, I agree with you that the US ought to keep our nose out of Irans’ election affairs.

  63. 78 Dave In Florida
    June 18, 2009 at 18:50

    Steve said: “Every time we go to help someone they eventually turn around and kick us in the pants. I’m sick and tired of it.”

    Amen! We have our problems here and no one ever offers us help. The rest of the world needs to be left alone to take care of itself. Iran will get through this.

  64. 79 Helen, B.A. Persian, Soas, London
    June 18, 2009 at 18:51

    No, I don’t believe the world should meddle.

    However, Iranians will no doubt understand that we watch their present struggle with bated breath – as we watched the U.S. elections where Bush was elected, many of us believe fraudulently. As we watched Zimbabwe not so long ago; and how about Aung San Su Kyi, still denied her rightful place, after all these years.

  65. 80 steve
    June 18, 2009 at 18:51

    @ John

    Given Mousavi would not impact Iranian foreign policy, how is this an Israeli plot given that regardless of who is President of Iran, Iran will remain hostile to Israel?

  66. 81 patti in cape coral
    June 18, 2009 at 18:52

    Once again, the speaker stated that Tehran is different than the rest of Iran, and is the only place where there is dissension with the results of the vote. How is any of this substantiated?

  67. 82 Anthony
    June 18, 2009 at 18:52

    This is like when Bush won in 2004. I didn’t know ONE person who voted for him, but that was in my area. I know in the south no one really voted for Kerry. People have to look at the whole (unfortunatly).

    -Anthony, LA, CA

  68. 83 steve
    June 18, 2009 at 18:52

    I have a feeling that there are way more Iranians in Iran than Iranian expats, and I have a feeling that the vast majority of Iranian expats would be against the current regime, hence why they left.

  69. 84 Phyllis , Naples Florida
    June 18, 2009 at 18:53


    Do not under estimate the impact that this has had on the world.

    It has given people hope that they could contribute to the change that they they see elsewhere.

    • 85 Harlan Bird (North Carolina, USA)
      June 22, 2009 at 05:43

      Do not over estimate the international effect of a two-year senator who got elected simply because he was a demagogue, and preyed upon the inarticulate fears of the lower middle class.

  70. June 18, 2009 at 18:54

    Having listened to the conversation I think it is unlikely that western countries comments and opinions will be listened to by the Iranian establishment and therefore we should refrain from direct comment.
    I see the UN as being the entity that should be involved, I think eventually all countries should deposit their constitutions and bills of rights with the UN and for the UN to run all elections, sadly with the republican animosity towards any entity that could possibly tell them what to do this has become less likely over the past 8 years, I fervently hope that the current administration will mend these bridges with the rest of us and become a leader in this matter.

  71. 87 Rosemary
    June 18, 2009 at 18:55

    Usually I feel that World Have Your Say presenters try hard to keep a balance of views. Today the guest from the US and the presenter seem to be pushing very hard to get callers to say that the US should make stronger statements about the Iranian election – a Republican/conservative position – rather than taking into account what other commentators (and I believe at least one guest on the program, who was not encouraged to talk) have said the old Iranian establishment would be able to do with statements like that!

    Also, the presenter seemed to be surprised by information I saw awhile ago on the New York Times “Lede” blog (and no doubt others), which is trying hard to keep up with the situation. See http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/18/latest-updates-on-irans-disputed-election-2/

    They have also carried information from people with evidence that the idea of rural support for Ahmedinejad may well be wrong.

  72. 88 Tom D Ford
    June 18, 2009 at 18:56

    @ steve
    June 18, 2009 at 18:39

    “Can you really blame Iran’s hostility to the US on Bush? If you’ll notice, the Iranian revolution took place during Carter’s Presidency, the hostages were taken on Carter’s watch, and they were released the very day Ronald Reagan was inaugurated. They seemed to hate us with Carter, an extreme liberal, in power. …”

    President Carter was a Conservative Democrat, not a Liberal.

    And remember that “Amiable Dunce” Reagan traded Arms to Iran for the release of those hostages.

    And Bush came into power and immediately started research on Nuclear bunker Buster Bombs to use on Iran, in his worldwide war of terror, how could anybody feel safe with the rogue leaders Bush/Cheney in power?

  73. 89 brinda,India
    June 18, 2009 at 18:56

    I do not see Iranian citizen opposing the religious leaders. They are okie with the supreme leader still directing the country.They still want that clearly.Probably more tranparency

    Is oil the main reason why the world has so much iof interest in this country? I think the general public(of the world) seem to be genuinely interested but not their givenments.

    How may more countire ar eto be ruined for oil ?

  74. 90 patti in cape coral
    June 18, 2009 at 18:58

    Is the rest of the world be meddlesome and impertinent? Are you kidding? Since when is it meddlesome and impertinent to have an opinion?

  75. June 18, 2009 at 19:00

    All the votes should be available to both parties for verification. If that doesn’t settle the issue and the government is obviously deceiving it’s people and the world, then the opposition should riot everyday and the World should support them. That doesn’t mean get involved and supply weapons! Let those countries that support democracy state their lack of approval and let each impose sanctions if they feel it’s appropriate.

  76. 92 Annabel
    June 18, 2009 at 19:03

    No. The Western world is doing enough.

    Keeping Twitter and Youtube etc up, and helping with proxies etc is sufficient in the interference pond. The protesters know they are being seen and heard outside Iran – they aren’t putting up posters in English for their authorities to read!

    Look at Ahmadinejad and Mousavi – These two are six of one and half a dozen of the other. One helped build the system the other maintains.

    It is probable that while disputed election results lit the fuse this turmoil is about more than who will be the next Iranian state president. While two old men are playing politics, the lives they are playing with might just be deciding how the political system is going to work tomorrow.

    Direct political interference from Western governments will simply add fuel to the fires already burning; add to the clampdowns, deaths and imprisonments and ultimately negate any reforms because they are foreign and not Iranian.

    The Iranians are a proud and intelligent people — let them sort out their own political system.

  77. June 18, 2009 at 19:04

    A little off the current debate topic, however why is there not a world ‘governed’ voting council that can oversee not only voting in problematic countries, but also countries such as the United States. I do understand the logistics and work involved, although the benefits must outweigh the costs for a system that will greatly improve a movement to creating a unified eastern / western world.

  78. 94 brinda,India
    June 18, 2009 at 19:05


    I agree with you.Even i got that feeling

  79. 95 EmilyS66
    June 18, 2009 at 19:11

    As the word meddle correlates to Iran, I dont think the world should intervene. As is, our(U.S.A) image in the United States is already mistrusted and fough against.
    I believe that in order for the pride of the Iranians to feel intact, the world should not try to stop/change the current events.
    I do think that through internet and social support, the world should share our views and keep in contact with the updates on the conflict.

  80. 96 steve
    June 18, 2009 at 19:12

    @ Tom D Ford

    (1) Jimmy Carter is an EXTREME liberal. He met with Hamas. Open your eyes.

    (2) Iran Contra was not about the US hostages in Iran, the proceeds of the sale of weapons to Iran went to get US Hostages in LEBANON, taken hostage by groups affiliated with Iran.

  81. 97 Mohsen Alavian
    June 18, 2009 at 19:47

    (Spelling mistake corrected)
    “Although I have voted for Mr Musavi, and at first I thought that election result is unfair but when I heard Mr Daneshjoo on the TV and I saw his comment on the thing that I doubt,i became convinced that there was no cheating in election,so i think USA should not interfere with other countries except the time that situation in that country became so disastrous,I think USA only sake his profit in interfering in every country situation and if our government do not do some thing that is right for us, USA wont give it too us as well.just look at what happened at Iraq.is their people situation better or worse from the time that they were under control of the Saddam regime?as they say,i will say it is worse”

  82. 98 T
    June 19, 2009 at 01:52

    Look at the irony in this situation. Obama’s been saying that Iran has no right to defend itself with nuclear weapons. And now, he’s going to turn around and stand up for the rights of the population protesting?

    What if someone told the States that they have no right to nuclear weapons? And then, they interefered when millions of Americans protested in the streets after a “rigged” election? If Obama did that, then he might as well cut off aid to Israel so that will force them to negotiate a settlement with the Palestinians.

  83. 99 sometimessad
    June 19, 2009 at 02:01

    Leaders of the world should clearly and firmly state their position but stay out. Iran has mechanisms to deal with this sort of thing. Not very good mechanisms, but it’s not like Burma where there is nothing. The world should let this thing play out. If the authorities start to comprehensively and brutally clamp down on the protesters, then the world can consider meddling.

  84. 100 James
    June 19, 2009 at 02:02

    As I was listening this morning (in the U.S. west coast, so may have been a rebroadcast), on the phone a character named Yousuf kept authoritatively saying he’d seen the Iran election results by region and asserted that rural region showed more support for Ahmedinejad than urban regions. However, reports by media organizations say election data has not been publicly released and overview data that has been released show a strange consistency in support for Ahmedinejad, even in urban areas, contrary to exit polling. Also, the government has clearly been trying to suppress the opposition rather than allow fair voicing of protest (pro-Ahmedinejad supports allowed to protest in Tehran, but opposition not). Don’t trust someone who sounds authoritative unless they specifically cite sources.

    I will cite my sources:
    – Was Iran’s election rigged? Here’s what is known so far. http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0617/p06s01-wome.html
    – New Analysis Points to Fraud in Iran http://voices.washingtonpost.com/behind-the-numbers/2009/06/new_analysis_points_to_fraud_i.html?hpid=topnews
    – Iran body to hear vote complaints http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/06/200961894741378976.html

  85. 101 Dennis Junior
    June 19, 2009 at 02:37

    Yes, of course; the world should be “meddle” in the situation
    in Iran

    ~Dennis Junior~

  86. 102 Tan Boon Tee
    June 19, 2009 at 03:42

    It all depends on whose definition of “meddling” one is talking about. One group may take it to mean a kind gesture to help, another may mean to bring in chaos or intervene with an ulterior motive.

    The Iranians are mature enough to look after their own welfares. Leave them alone, they have their pride and dignity. Let them sort out their own problems. And everything will be FINE eventually.

  87. 103 ali
    June 19, 2009 at 06:49

    no why they did not medlle in other election with result of 96% in some of the arab world or only those who are not online with the west can be medlle with

  88. 104 scmehta
    June 19, 2009 at 07:23

    How can we address the global concerns if we desist from voicing our opinions whenever, any where in the world, there is gross injustice and abuse of the human rights? In Iran, despite the elections being their internal affair, the agony of their people, in protest against the unfair management of the elections and consequent rigging of the result, does need support from the democracies all around the world.

  89. 105 aero
    June 19, 2009 at 08:15

    Sovereignty/autonomy/self-government, self-determination, and self-awareness (national identity) are cornerstone principles that define nations throughout the world. These principles when interpreted give value and meaning to a nation’s existence. As a result, nations around the world see these principles as a right.
    Any attempt to violate these rights would be deemed a threat to the value, and meaning of the nation’s existence. Through-out the centuries wars have been constantly fought over these violations of rights.
    Societies develop and undergo change as they meet, engage and conquer or are defeated by new challenges. This is a natural process that allows for learning, accommodates ingenuity and thought, and should not be tampered with as history has taught us.
    Iran is going through its unique challenges that involves specifics of culture, norms, politics, economy, religion and beliefs and so on and all these issues gel in a manner that identifies this current upheaval as Iranian in identity. This development must proceed and be influenced from within. While there would be an unavoidable external influence (this is a given) but the major driving force must come from within otherwise the society would never properly adapt to change that is completely external, little understood and is void of local participation and effort.
    The point is that if the world meddles in Iran it would only devalue Iran’s image as a sovereign nation, and would only serve to indicate that its peoples and systems are incapable of self-government, self-determination etc. and that’s an insult.

  90. June 19, 2009 at 10:01

    The vehment protests launched by the Iranians following the ‘resounding’ victory of Ahemedi-Nijad is nothing but an expression of a suppressed society.The world knows that the Iranians are ubjugated by the theocratic and conservative regime.The rigging of elections provided a golden opportunity for the people to strike back at the root of gpvernance.The people are craving for freedom liberty and self respect, all of which are practically denied.The quelling of the protest may not solve the problem.The solution is with bringing about fundamental changes in the governaance and in the attitude of the regime to the people.

  91. 107 Deodatus Biches
    June 19, 2009 at 10:35

    People and countries should speak up if need be. No one or country is an Island. If is in fact a duty for others to speak up if they see something going wrong in another country. After all, it is only speaking, no one is saying that other countries should pick up arms and go into Iran to set things right. So let them speak.

  92. 108 john in Germany
    June 19, 2009 at 10:37

    Effectively Iran is ruled by one man, whom we hope is wise, and of peaceful intention.

    However a society that depresses its Female population, that still makes statements of hate against the Americans-which intern effects us all. Whom preaches Death to the Jews, and is in reality determined to remove them from the face of the earth. is a danger to us all. How can we feel at ease with an Atomic threat developing in Iran as well. Have no Doubt, it is.

    We are by no means perfect, but President Obahma has reached out as far as he dare. The answer to his efforts is in the Mullahs speech. If you worry about the future for your Grandchildren then worry about Iran, (don’t forget North Korea as well).

    Have a nice weekend.
    John in Germany.

  93. 109 Tolutola
    June 19, 2009 at 11:13

    I think it is best to let sleeping dogs lie.
    The world should leave Iran to sort out itself.
    I believe in a matter of weeks this whole issue will be history.

    Jos, Nigeria

  94. 110 Shree Krishna Paudel
    June 19, 2009 at 11:28

    No democracy can tolerate the persent situation in Iran. Iranian people should be given the riglt to peaceful protest. Fresh election should immediately be conducted. Otherwise the world would not stay calm & do meddle in Iran for democracy, democracy, & democracy. That would cause “the death to the doctator”, as Iranian people chanted in their slogan.

  95. 111 Amos Laar
    June 19, 2009 at 11:37

    I am gravely disappointed in the Grand Ayatollah Khomeini for refusing to listen to his Followers. His Friday Speech is self-destructive. This is a manifestation that the system has lost its authenticity, it will surely forfeit the loyalty of millions Iranians who were behind it just a day ago. I prophesy that by tomorrow noon, this system will be dismissed as one of the many irrelevant religious clubs who are out of touch with the needs of their Followers.

    Laar in Accra, Ghana

  96. 112 Karen J-L
    June 19, 2009 at 14:12

    I believe AND pray the US doesn’t get involved. Let the Iranians take care of their own problems. Could you imagine if another country got involved in one of our presidential elections?!?!?! OMG – the US and it’s people would have a fit. No, I think we should let the Iranians sort it out themselves – their country, their mess.

  97. 113 Tom K in Mpls
    June 19, 2009 at 15:55


  98. 114 chilinout
    June 19, 2009 at 17:36

    “Divide and conquer.” as Julius Ceasar said and Romans strategy in the history. I am sad after watching that people are revolting against the authority in Iran. A country which has thousands years of culture, solidarity and unitary now is going to collapse. Besides, the mainstream global broadcast channels are also taking side with supporting the opposition in Iran.That should not be the way they approach to the issue.They are not being objective and ignoring media ethics. The opposition supporters must know that, no citizen of any country in the world today is totally happy about their governments’ policies or regime in their homeland. One day, they will find out they were misleaded and regret what they did but its gonna be too late. It is not about religion, beliefs or norms, it is about consuming the world, please get this people!

  99. 115 David
    June 19, 2009 at 20:37

    People with real brain do not comment on things they do not know or understand. There are wise people out there who should be leading this world out of its misguided path.

    I had the patiency of listening to President Obama’s speech on the matter in question. And I thought, this is the person we need at times of darkness to lead us out of this dark room.


  100. June 20, 2009 at 12:33

    News coverage should be universal and any country is rightly put under the microscope if knowledge is to be acquired.

  101. 117 Barbara Smith
    June 20, 2009 at 14:58

    Strength and support to the PEOPLE of Iran from the PEOPLE of the United States! Your courage will give others hope for change. The true worth of the Internet shows when we see that people of the world can indeed have their say even when governments try to stop them. And yes, this is true of all governments, because those in power always want to stay in power whether in Iran, the United States or any other country you may choose.

  102. 118 shammah kiteme
    June 21, 2009 at 09:17

    Anyone bleeding anywhere in the world makes the whole world bleed.we should not sit and watch a dictatorship of many continue to shape iranian society.It is the world meddling in Nairobi that brought sense and a halt to the madness that was happening here after 2007 elections the iranian citizens who are being silenced by crude force will live to blame us for never speaking for them when the tyrrant chose to enforce his rule by bullet after rigging the ballot INJUSTICE ANYWHERE IS INJUSTICE EVERYWHERE

  103. June 21, 2009 at 16:46

    I recommend everyone to simply drop their assertion that there was any rigging, besides, Mahmoud is by a large margin more popular in Iran then Mousavi; no wonder we only see violent protests (burning buses, mosque, attacking military posts) in Tehran. These protests displayed in the hands of thugs, if they occurred in the USA, would be branded as ‘low level terrorism’ by the Department of Defense.

    Now back to the question. If history is right, then meddling in Muslim countries will only drive us to disaster. The west have been muddling with them for so long that I find it a bit rich that they now somehow want to appeal to the Iranians as pro-democracy, when in fact they’ve installed Iranian-type regimes all over the Arab world. This is why when the West now speaks of human rights, no one there listens because we no longer have any credibility.

  104. 120 Peyman (25 years old guy in Iran)
    June 21, 2009 at 22:10

    Guys don’t be naive. People of Iran are not all bigoted, blind, Islamic fanatic. Iran is not just Ahmadinezhad and supreme leader and their hardliner followers, here are a lot of educated, informed, free thinking people who are taking their last breaths under these dark ages in Iran’s history. It’s just caring for another human being not that we want you to practically come here and get beaten and killed alongside Iranians here. It’s better if other countries force Iran to stop the violence, and not acknowledge the regime and even boycott buying of oil to some extent. Please don’t add insult to injury by spreading cruel comments. These guys are as real as your brothers and sisters; they have loved ones who will mourn for the rest of their lives if something happens to them. How come you all cry when Oprah’s dog dies but you don’t care when actual people who have just stood up against blind theological dictatorship are being killed. We are not in favor of Nuclear bombs those bigoted dictators who are killing us now are. We voted to soften the extremist but they remained in power by the means of Coup D’état. Please stand by democracy and free speech. 

  105. 121 T
    June 22, 2009 at 04:03

    No. Realistically, what can be done?:

    Attack Iran (a sovereign nation that hasn’t attacked anybody)?
    Engineer a CIA backed coup to destroy the government? Secret attacks by U.S. and British commandoes had been going on long before this started. Is this an extension of that?
    Cut diplomatic relations w/Iran? There are none.
    Add more sanctions? What good would that do?

    Sad as it is, no other country would be stupid enough to interfere in Iran’s internal affairs. I suggest that the States do the same.

  106. 122 B. Abadi
    June 22, 2009 at 04:59

    I think the main source of most problems in Iran and the rest of the Middle East and beyond is the business of religion which one day soon must be wiped off our planet by criminalizing it. Of course I also believe in freedom of thought for every one if so choose to believe in religion as long as it is confined to someone’s private life and it is not mass promoted.

  107. 123 Harlan Bird (North Carolina, USA)
    June 22, 2009 at 05:38

    We can’t reject the option of intervention simply because the last two have gone awry. These issues should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. While the Iraqis may not have been begging for help, the Iranians are.

  108. 124 Peyman M (Stockholm, Sweden)
    June 22, 2009 at 14:18

    Free the Iranian people from these cruel, non-human, nasty, filty Ayatollas. USA and England helped to bring these ayatollas to power in 1979(It was all about the OIL). It’s all about the money as usual! Obama here is your chance to set things right for the Iranian people just like Bush did for the Irakian people by elimanting Saddam Hussein (Note that USA helped to bring him to the power). Bush would not hesitate for one second!

  109. 125 Jennifer
    June 22, 2009 at 14:54

    My first reaction was NO but the more I have heard; the more I want to help and encourage the brave people there to stand up for the direction they want to go!

    Sarah Palin said it best on twitter: “Women worldwide watching Iran protests led by women demanding fair election & equality; their voices loud, strong; they will usher in change”

    They have my support!

  110. 126 P
    June 23, 2009 at 14:54

    Not only in large cities, even in small towns people were in favor of Mr.Mousavi. Young generation here are not capable of doing anything because of the repression, they are fed up with the regime but regardless of the fact that we all knew even with more moderate president, situation as whole won’t be much different (because of the supreme leader) we went to vote hoping to earn just as little freedom as we could hope for. However, the regime and the so called supreme leader could not bear to give out even that small amount of freedom so they made Ahmadinezhad remain in power by the means of Coup D’état with the help of revolutionary guards and Basij and militia forces. We couldn’t accept being deprived of the result of our legal and legitimate movement so we went on doing some calm and civilized protests. Look what has happened in result of that. They made Tehran like a war zone. Killing more than 50 and arresting more than 1000. They are even receiving help from Hezbollah forces however they deny it completely. All the protests and demonstrations are peaceful, I mean before they attack people like animals. People of Iran will wipe this hypocrite regime off of their land one day, if not this time but your savagery proved how scared and fragile the whole system has become and will be shattered real soon.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: