What's new

Iran Equips Destroyer with Upgraded Surface-to-Air Missile

Will see ...
Why "WILL SEE"!? We made AESA radars long time ago.. we have them operational... I don't understand why you even reply to this tork burnasss... He comes here to show how obsessed and backward they are... please spare our time and energy...we already know that fact!

The proof, as they say, is in the pudding.

Iranians haven't revolted en masse against the current government, so, logically, it has enough support.

Does this mean everyone loves IRI and agrees on every single thing, and has pictures of Khameini in their wallet? No, of course not. You have 80 million people with 80 million views.

Even among the government, you won't find people thinking the same. Even among the Guardian Council or Majlis or Assembly of Experts, they don't agree on a lot of things.

Keep in mind that IRI is an evolving system, that's the best thing about it. We used to have a Prime Minister! We don't anymore. Laws are constantly changing. I remember a time when families hid their music tapes in their house and now you have concerts in Burj Milad. Should be there be more concerts? Some believe so and are pushing for it. Should there be less concerns? Some believe so and are pushing for it.

The changes that are happening in Iran are a constant struggle between various groups to bring in the changes they believe in. But most reforms are LOCAL reforms, which is why we have one of the most stable countries in the region, EVEN though we have so many enemies!

One final thing. I sincerely believe Iran is one of the most democratic countries in the world. First of all, we need to define what democracy means. Democracy is a system of government, it's not a system of values! I've seen the word "democracy" be used in a lot of silly ways. For example, they say, if a country doesn't have certain rights for its people, then it's not democratic. Why? What has that got to do with the meaning of the word?

So, here's one definition,
"A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives"

It has nothing to do with equal rights or tolerance or loving each other or not setting anyone on fire. It's a political structure. We like to make every word emotionally laden which, of course, makes it hard for people to understand reality.

As an example, imagine a small village in the middle of nowhere. These village has 100 citizens. They decide to have a democratic system. They vote in 5 people to form a council to pass laws. The first law they pass is to execute anyone with red hair. The village has 99 people with black hair and most of them hate people with red heads. They have a stupid belief that anyone with red hair is the child of the devil. There are a few tolerant people among them, but as a whole, they all hate red heads. So, once the vote is passed, everyone is happy. To make it even more democratic, they take a vote on the law, and find that 90% of them vote "YES" on "LAW 3833 EXECUTE RED?"

That might be morally repulsive, but it's democratic.
Ahsant... very well said..
 
in future as the sanction is removed will Iran use the local or CHINA RUSSIA SAM in the navy ship
 
The proof, as they say, is in the pudding.

Iranians haven't revolted en masse against the current government, so, logically, it has enough support.

Does this mean everyone loves IRI and agrees on every single thing, and has pictures of Khameini in their wallet? No, of course not. You have 80 million people with 80 million views.

Even among the government, you won't find people thinking the same. Even among the Guardian Council or Majlis or Assembly of Experts, they don't agree on a lot of things.

Keep in mind that IRI is an evolving system, that's the best thing about it. We used to have a Prime Minister! We don't anymore. Laws are constantly changing. I remember a time when families hid their music tapes in their house and now you have concerts in Burj Milad. Should be there be more concerts? Some believe so and are pushing for it. Should there be less concerns? Some believe so and are pushing for it.

The changes that are happening in Iran are a constant struggle between various groups to bring in the changes they believe in. But most reforms are LOCAL reforms, which is why we have one of the most stable countries in the region, EVEN though we have so many enemies!

One final thing. I sincerely believe Iran is one of the most democratic countries in the world. First of all, we need to define what democracy means. Democracy is a system of government, it's not a system of values! I've seen the word "democracy" be used in a lot of silly ways. For example, they say, if a country doesn't have certain rights for its people, then it's not democratic. Why? What has that got to do with the meaning of the word?

So, here's one definition,
"A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives"

It has nothing to do with equal rights or tolerance or loving each other or not setting anyone on fire. It's a political structure. We like to make every word emotionally laden which, of course, makes it hard for people to understand reality.

As an example, imagine a small village in the middle of nowhere. These village has 100 citizens. They decide to have a democratic system. They vote in 5 people to form a council to pass laws. The first law they pass is to execute anyone with red hair. The village has 99 people with black hair and most of them hate people with red heads. They have a stupid belief that anyone with red hair is the child of the devil. There are a few tolerant people among them, but as a whole, they all hate red heads. So, once the vote is passed, everyone is happy. To make it even more democratic, they take a vote on the law, and find that 90% of them vote "YES" on "LAW 3833 EXECUTE RED?"

That might be morally repulsive, but it's democratic.
@Serpentine @Daneshmand @rahi2357 @kollang @mohsen

whats your views on this post ?
 
The proof, as they say, is in the pudding.

Iranians haven't revolted en masse against the current government, so, logically, it has enough support.

Does this mean everyone loves IRI and agrees on every single thing, and has pictures of Khameini in their wallet? No, of course not. You have 80 million people with 80 million views.

Even among the government, you won't find people thinking the same. Even among the Guardian Council or Majlis or Assembly of Experts, they don't agree on a lot of things.

Keep in mind that IRI is an evolving system, that's the best thing about it. We used to have a Prime Minister! We don't anymore. Laws are constantly changing. I remember a time when families hid their music tapes in their house and now you have concerts in Burj Milad. Should be there be more concerts? Some believe so and are pushing for it. Should there be less concerns? Some believe so and are pushing for it.

The changes that are happening in Iran are a constant struggle between various groups to bring in the changes they believe in. But most reforms are LOCAL reforms, which is why we have one of the most stable countries in the region, EVEN though we have so many enemies!

One final thing. I sincerely believe Iran is one of the most democratic countries in the world. First of all, we need to define what democracy means. Democracy is a system of government, it's not a system of values! I've seen the word "democracy" be used in a lot of silly ways. For example, they say, if a country doesn't have certain rights for its people, then it's not democratic. Why? What has that got to do with the meaning of the word?

So, here's one definition,
"A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives"

It has nothing to do with equal rights or tolerance or loving each other or not setting anyone on fire. It's a political structure. We like to make every word emotionally laden which, of course, makes it hard for people to understand reality.

As an example, imagine a small village in the middle of nowhere. These village has 100 citizens. They decide to have a democratic system. They vote in 5 people to form a council to pass laws. The first law they pass is to execute anyone with red hair. The village has 99 people with black hair and most of them hate people with red heads. They have a stupid belief that anyone with red hair is the child of the devil. There are a few tolerant people among them, but as a whole, they all hate red heads. So, once the vote is passed, everyone is happy. To make it even more democratic, they take a vote on the law, and find that 90% of them vote "YES" on "LAW 3833 EXECUTE RED?"

That might be morally repulsive, but it's democratic.
You would have been right on democratic if:
1- Guardian council approval and supervision (nezarate estesvabi) was removed!
2- Velayate Faghi was abolished or limited to non executive rules. ( I prefer abolished)

Having the two above takes the essence of democracy which is ruling people over people. You may put a rule on what is needed to qualify for an elected position but you may not seek out to eliminate candidates based on secretive police activities.
You can not have an elected president (supposedly) and elected parliament( so called) and have someone overrule it single highhandedly.You can have a panel voting on legalities of President and parliament decisions based on the constitution and rules but that is it.

Having the two flaws mentioned above puts Iran system under the worst totalitarian type regimes which is theocratic dictatorship unfortunately. Now if the flavor of the totalitarian regime is milder by having different voices that support the same system then that doesn't make it any better!

Can someone like me be elected as a president of Iran? No way!
 
Democracy is when Deez nuts sweeps 9% of the votes in local elections .

only and only at that point you're a democracy . when Deez nuts can participate .

excuse my sarcasm
 
Democracy is when Deez nuts sweeps 9% of the votes in local elections .

only and only at that point you're a democracy . when Deez nuts can participate .

excuse my sarcasm
Yes it is and that shows no matter what you get 9% of the vote! Sorry for our parliament members that got 5% of the vote anyways! They have age limit to rule out candidates at his age.

So what is your point?
 
Yes it is and that shows no matter what you get 9% of the vote! Sorry for our parliament members that got 5% of the vote anyways! They have age limit to rule out candidates at his age.

So what is your point?
First of all , i think we're all on the same team . no matter who you are and which political candidate you follow and support or even whatever system you follow ( be it IRI , seculars , ...) , our hearts beat for one thing and that is our country Iran .

(unless you're a shahi :D )

secondly what do you mean from this : "Sorry for our parliament members that got 5% of the vote anyways! "

what does this supposed to mean ? we can continue in the chill thread
 
You would have been right on democratic if:
1- Guardian council approval and supervision (nezarate estesvabi) was removed!
2- Velayate Faghi was abolished or limited to non executive rules. ( I prefer abolished)

Having the two above takes the essence of democracy which is ruling people over people. You may put a rule on what is needed to qualify for an elected position but you may not seek out to eliminate candidates based on secretive police activities.
You can not have an elected president (supposedly) and elected parliament( so called) and have someone overrule it single highhandedly.You can have a panel voting on legalities of President and parliament decisions based on the constitution and rules but that is it.

Having the two flaws mentioned above puts Iran system under the worst totalitarian type regimes which is theocratic dictatorship unfortunately. Now if the flavor of the totalitarian regime is milder by having different voices that support the same system then that doesn't make it any better!

Can someone like me be elected as a president of Iran? No way!

Why can't a society choose a system where they elect their "betters" or "elders" or whatever, to monitor their process? In USA, there is no popular vote, there is an electoral system, is that more democratic? In UK, the prime minister isn't voted directly by the people, it is chosen by the party. They also have unelected House of Lords. Is that democratic? In most countries, you will have certain positions that are not directly voted by people. For example, lets use USA as an example. When there was a dispute regarding the election between Bush and Gore, they took the case to the Supreme Court, whose judges are not directly elected by the people.

We have a million other examples like this. Why can all those countries have different systems of democratic structure, except us? Why are all their systems valid (from us to UK to Greece to Spain) except ours?

The truth is, more important than anything else, in Iran there is a CULTURE of elections that has existed after the revolution. Why do you think the turnover is so high? Higher than western countries? Because the people really it extremely seriously. The same way they take the majlis elections seriously. But you know what elections they really take seriously? City council elections. Oh man, go to any, ANY, city or village in Iran in city council elections. The smaller the cities are, the more everyone takes them seriously.

Finally, to add to that, do you know in big Iranian companies, there are elections to choose a representative of the employees? This is as per the law. We have it in our company, and we are relatively small (150 employees), and we have had elections and people take even that seriously.

Oh, I wanted to add something to this comment, "Can someone like me be elected as a president of Iran? No way!". In ANY democratic system, the person who has a chance to get elected is the one that is part of the system. For example, in party based systems, that is very true, because the party chooses the leader (such as UK). But even if USA. To get anywhere, you have to be either part of the Democrat or Republican party line. If not, up and you don't have the party backing you and don't have the campaign money and the lobbies behind you, how far would you get? How far did any independent candidate get?
 
Last edited:
This thread has been somewhat active so I came here expecting new discussions on Iranian SAM's for our ships, but instead:

p4pb5840634.jpg


:D
 

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom