No- Khomeini came back to Iran after his exile to France. Prime Minister Bakhtiar was the one who had support after the Shah was removed. He brought with him a large congregation of his followers and got several thousand members of the army to defect to his side and turn on Bakhtiar. Then he declared a Jihad on the rest of us who did not join him. Weapons and ammunition were gained by him, and it was impossible to stop him from taking over. Then our Islamic constitution was drafted and Khomeini was named Grand Ayatollah. From then on, his position acted as the leader of the clergy and nation.

The "president" of Iran is but a puppet to them, who acts as a mouthpiece to the rest of the world. Ahmadinejad included. The clergy decides who wins and who loses in the elections, regardless of who the people want as president and regardless of what you or anyone else may think contrare to this.

To you, but thankfully your opinion does not matter in the long run because it's within a minority among the executive and legislative members. Neither does mine, butmy opinion sides with that of the people in power. And they want to improve relations with Iran- not just let ourselves always be at odds as you and your ilk would have it. And they will not be deterred by objections by someone like you.:up:

My "ilk"? :DL

Yes. The people who would have us isolationist and non-negotiation with them. Who wouldn't even bother to try.:D

Come off it, no one could honestly deny that Iran funds and trains terrorists. Then again no one could honestly deny that the US funds and trains terrorists either, so that puts the whole "but they support terrorism" argument out of the window for both parties.



Ah of course, the MEK .
Now which country is sitting on a pile of those terrorists funds and is repeatedly having politicians putting forward bills in both houses to not only release the funds but also re open their offices in the country for more terrorist fundraising?

Actually since there are no viable options available he would be a fool not to negotiate, though of course now that Irans regional threats have been eliminated for them it isn't really a good time to negotiate as America is playing with a weak hand.....but you can't turn the clock back and play with the hand you threw away and you can't wait in the hope of a new hand as it looks like it will be decades before the cards are redealt(unless of course you can get Putin in to fix the game in your favour, which isn't very likely)

They've got the Basij to act as their terrorists, lol. But anyway, I was merely asking what evidence he had for this? Personally, I would not doubt the plausibility of such an idea- it's just that nobody has ever come forward in their case with any real proof. Like with the Mujahideen, their members admitted the US financed them. Members of the CIA admitted to financing them. But with Iran- I've never heard or seen any terrorist groups openly stating that they've received support from them. And Iran continues to deny it. I'll put it like this: my people don't like terrorists anymore than your people. Because they know that they're a serious threat and they know that they could turn on them in a second if they wanted to and cause some serious damage.

Well where do you want to start?
Kurdistan ? the various groups there have got training and funding from mong others Iran Iraq Israel America Russia Syria....
Keeping it in the region you have the Badr brigades trained and based in Iran as part of the supreme council for islamic revolution in Iraq(thats the people the US put in power with their invasion funnily enough)
On the same note SCIRI opened offices for foriegn political groups for diplomatic representation with the emerging Iraqi government. One group that had its "consulate" in Iraq in a SCIRI facility was of course HezB'allah who strangly enough were originally trained and armed by the revolutionary guard.
As that brings it over to the west of the mid-east I suppose the recent intercepted weapons shipments to Hamas is worth a mention.
Or should we go further west to Pakistan and talk about the rebels in Baluchistan?

Thats true , my country was founded by terrorists and a right bunch of muppets they turned out to be, we still have terrorists now and they are still idiots after all these years.
Some people do like them though.

Where are you getting this from? SOURCES, DAMMIT, SOURCES.:)

The Badr Organization was never endorsed by the Iranian government; they were just a bunch of rejects who didn't like Saddam who decided that they'd band together and fight Iraq during the Iran-Iraq War. We were doing the hard work, not them. They were never our allies. It's punishable by death if you're caught helping them or are found to have had any ties with them. That Allawi chap alleges that we had them kill Iraqi officers after the coup on Saddam, but he's never even bothered to investigate this- nor has he produced anything that takes his words beyond wild claims.

Hezbollah was not trained by the RG. They, like the Badr Organization, were a bunch of rejects (anarchists, exiles, revolutionists, etc.) who decided to band together after the Islamic Revolution (it inspired them really) and form a rebel group. Now some of their leaders were members of the RG, but none of them were on active duty. Most actually had deserted from the army- especially so during the middle years of Iraq's war on us when things were looking bad. Very bad.

Now they have been giving money to Hamas. Not for weapons, but because they feel that "Hamas has acted as a charitable organization, that builds schools and hospitals and steps in where the Palestinian Authority has failed". But I'll give you that one; $47 million less than the Saudis have been contributing to them, but they have been giving them money nevertheless.

Which ones? They've got like two-dozen rebel organizations. The Jundallah, Bugti Militants, Dad Shahs, Baluchi Liberation Front... to name a few. Those people agree on nothing. If they're not doing deals with each other one minute, then they're at each other's throats the second. So disorganized that nobody bothers funding them. Not even Al-Qaeda takes them seriously. India has been sending in people to hunt them down for decades, and every year, hundreds of them are caught and executed like the dogs they are.

Well I wouldn't call the founding fathers terrorists, per say. Like us, they were revolutionaries. They used guerilla tactics to win skirmishes as well, just like us.

I must admit I liked some of the things they stood for, but because of their tactics, I could not keep on liking them.

Garlic or Pepper?

Some high-quality pics of the march from those who were there:

http://www.theruthlessforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=3155

...likes how this robust discussion is being conducted without personal attacks, name-calling, etc. Keep up the good work, guys. :up: