• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

This is the picture of Iranian women in 1979, before Islamic Revolution:

Zeze

Lifer
Mar 4, 2011
10,463
585
126
Soooo free looking, so beautiful. When I was in London, I was appalled to see some beautiful 'urbanized' middle easterners with amazing bods and beautiful eyes.

It's shame they have to don those replusive masks now.

More pictures here:


Credits to reddit.

 
Last edited:

Vic Vega

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2010
4,536
3
0
Shame to see Persia conquered by these cavemen. Once the center of the world in art, science, industry and economy.

Now all they can do is hate Israel, and torture their women.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
They don't have to wear the masks in Iran, just the head scarves.
What about the rest of the clothing?

Sadly Iran was a very modern society. The craptastic Shah wasn't admirable in any way but there wasn't an oppressive influence on the social structure to conform to someones religious dress code. It will take a long time for Iran to break free and be what it could have been.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,568
2
0
The only reason the middle east is anything but a barbaric wasteland is oil. Once that runs out, they'll either grow up quick or fade into obscurity.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
30,116
3,653
126
Shame to see Persia conquered by these cavemen. Once the center of the world in art, science, industry and economy.

Now all they can do is hate Israel, and torture their women.
They torture all minorities.

Then our minority supporting party stops us from annihilating the oppressors.

World may just have gone insane.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
Iran is a marvelous place and the great majority of it's people are responsible and peaceful. It's the leadership and a minority which are troubling and able to cause trouble.

If the situation were different it would be on my short list of places to travel to. Maybe in my children's lifetime they could.
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
Iran is a marvelous place and the great majority of it's people are responsible and peaceful. It's the leadership and a minority which are troubling and able to cause trouble.

If the situation were different it would be on my short list of places to travel to. Maybe in my children's lifetime they could.
Seems just like in America, even as evidenced in this forum sometimes, people think the lunatic fringe is the majority, or representative anyway.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
Seems just like in America, even as evidenced in this forum sometimes, people think the lunatic fringe is the majority, or representative anyway.
They are loud so it seems there are more than there are. I do wish that the majority were more informed and generally more aware, but that extends to almost all issues, not just the ME.
 

feralkid

Lifer
Jan 28, 2002
15,445
3,005
126
Shame to see Persia conquered by these cavemen. Once the center of the world in art, science, industry and economy.

Now all they can do is hate Israel, and torture their women.



The "cavemen" of which you speak are all Persians, too.

"The more you know".
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,576
431
126
Seems just like in America, even as evidenced in this forum sometimes, people think the lunatic fringe is the majority, or representative anyway.
The common Iranian is certainly not the lunatic fringe, but I think that the common refrain that "Iranians love the West, love shopping, love freedom!" is equally inaccurate. That is a fantasy that we only want to believe.

They are a conservative nation whose people at best fall somewhere between the religiousness and bigotry of Egypt and Turkey. That's pretty mild as far as Islamic countries go, but it's sure as hell not on the same level as Britain or America. Adminehjad does in fact enjoy huge amounts of popular support (less lately as sanctions are taking a strong toll). They will not change soon.

Washington Post - Polling in Iran Shows Real Support for Ahmadinejad

While Western news reports from Tehran in the days leading up to the voting portrayed an Iranian public enthusiastic about Ahmadinejad's principal opponent, Mir Hossein Mousavi, our scientific sampling from across all 30 of Iran's provinces showed Ahmadinejad well ahead.

Independent and uncensored nationwide surveys of Iran are rare. Typically, preelection polls there are either conducted or monitored by the government and are notoriously untrustworthy. By contrast, the poll undertaken by our nonprofit organizations from May 11 to May 20 was the third in a series over the past two years. Conducted by telephone from a neighboring country, field work was carried out in Farsi by a polling company whose work in the region for ABC News and the BBC has received an Emmy award. Our polling was funded by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.

The breadth of Ahmadinejad's support was apparent in our preelection survey. During the campaign, for instance, Mousavi emphasized his identity as an Azeri, the second-largest ethnic group in Iran after Persians, to woo Azeri voters. Our survey indicated, though, that Azeris favored Ahmadinejad by 2 to 1 over Mousavi.

Much commentary has portrayed Iranian youth and the Internet as harbingers of change in this election. But our poll found that only a third of Iranians even have access to the Internet, while 18-to-24-year-olds comprised the strongest voting bloc for Ahmadinejad of all age groups.

The only demographic groups in which our survey found Mousavi leading or competitive with Ahmadinejad were university students and graduates, and the highest-income Iranians. When our poll was taken, almost a third of Iranians were also still undecided. Yet the baseline distributions we found then mirror the results reported by the Iranian authorities, indicating the possibility that the vote is not the product of widespread fraud.

Some might argue that the professed support for Ahmadinejad we found simply reflected fearful respondents' reluctance to provide honest answers to pollsters. Yet the integrity of our results is confirmed by the politically risky responses Iranians were willing to give to a host of questions. For instance, nearly four in five Iranians -- including most Ahmadinejad supporters -- said they wanted to change the political system to give them the right to elect Iran's supreme leader, who is not currently subject to popular vote. Similarly, Iranians chose free elections and a free press as their most important priorities for their government, virtually tied with improving the national economy. These were hardly "politically correct" responses to voice publicly in a largely authoritarian society.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
The common Iranian is certainly not the lunatic fringe, but I think that the common refrain that "Iranians love the West, love shopping, love freedom!" is equally inaccurate. It is a fantasy.
That would be true. It would be useful therefore to attempt to understand the sentiment of the "average" Iranian. Obviously there no such thing but I believe you understand what I mean.

I'm going back in recent history to the point before the "Axis" speech. At that point Iranians had pro-US demonstrations after 9/11. The Ayatolah kept the various factions played off against one another. The moderate pro west leaders and the Ahmadinejad types. Remember that Ali Khamenei has more power than the rest of the government combined and he knows it. When the West wasn't seen as the aggressor he was content to let the moderates make overtures to us and the attitudes of the people reflected that.

Then we had "Axis", a testament that a few unthinking words can cause a whole lot of grief. Bush defined the Iranians as the enemy with a broad stroke. Whether he meant to do it is another, but it was a mistake a first year diplomat would never have done. The damage was incredible. Virtually overnight the militant hard liners gained control with "see, we told you that the West was our enemy, and America IS Satan."

Iranians are highly nationalistic and the pronouncement of them being evil got the reaction you'd expect. The moderates got kicked, the crazies gained control and then took steps to prevent their unseating, ever. The election rules were changed.

Those people who supported us on 9/11 were looked at as idiots or criminals, and they themselves felt betrayed, and they were.

So why should they now embrace us? They don't. That doesn't mean they hate us but they don't trust us either and I don't know when that will change.

Imabreadbasket (I love doing that to that man) and the government own the airwaves. The people are constantly bombarded by stories and "news" calculated for his benefit and his masters. Consider the support for the Iraq War? The news people didn't question , the politicians didn't either because of complicity or cowardice and the results was "Boo yeah let's go get those terrorists!" It's even worse in Iran.

They are a conservative nation whose people at best fall somewhere between the religiousness and bigotry of Egypt and Turkey.
When the picture in the OP was taken that was untrue. I had friends who were Jewish and their families lived there for generations. At no point did they feel threatened or discriminated against. When the Shah got kicked and the current powers established they and a great many fled and it's a good thing they did. Not all their family and friends who stayed survived. Just when it looked like we would return to something like real tolerance, though not acceptance, Bush shit the bed. So let's see... I figure that the ME will settle out in about 20 years because like it or not oil will become less significant and that removes the economic grease supporting the present government. Then about 30 years for chaos to clear and the necessity of a secular and less threatening government... I'd say in 50 years we'll be back to an environment like that we once saw. About a hundred year social recovery.
 

RU482

Lifer
Apr 9, 2000
12,686
2
81
The only reason the middle east is anything but a barbaric wasteland is oil. Once that runs out, they'll either grow up quick or fade into obscurity.
funny, how simple that sounds. I'm sure they'll fade away slowly and quietly, happy with the trillions of dollars that have gained from their years controlling the spiquot of black gold
 

IGBT

Lifer
Jul 16, 2001
17,707
49
91
yet another retrograde legacy of the carter admin. no surprise jimmy likes his women in potato sacks.
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,819
1,123
126
and the shit and run retard reply finally arrives... thread complete thanks to i gnawed ballz today.
 

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,497
436
126
If only their experiment in democracy wasn't fucked with back in the 1950s...

If only...
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,819
1,123
126
That makes absolutely no sense. Why don't we blame it on Harding too?

His critical thinking skills extend to looking up who was a the democrat in office near a historical event in time then blame them for it. Pretty standard grade school stuff. If of course you arrive at school on a very short bus.
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
The common Iranian is certainly not the lunatic fringe, but I think that the common refrain that "Iranians love the West, love shopping, love freedom!" is equally inaccurate. That is a fantasy that we only want to believe.
Not as enthusiastically as that maybe, but don't be fooled, people in the ME don't have nearly the problem with the west as the powers that be would like us to think. I'd hazard that the reason your statement is true is because it doesn't exist there. Look at places like Kuwait, or Qatar, their malls are bigger than ours.
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,819
1,123
126
Probably because the Islamic Revolution happened under his watch, over throwing the US friendly Shah.
I must have missed all the shit and run posts from i gee bee tee blaming Bush for 9-11 using that criteria... Selective scrutiny is very telling.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
Probably because the Islamic Revolution happened under his watch, over throwing the US friendly Shah.
I assume that's so but they overthrew an appointed dictator and there was nothing that Carter could have done to prevent it. It would be like blaming someone for an earthquake.
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
I must have missed all the shit and run posts from i gee bee tee blaming Bush for 9-11 using that criteria... Selective scrutiny is very telling.
I assume that's so but they overthrew an appointed dictator and there was nothing that Carter could have done to prevent it. It would be like blaming someone for an earthquake.
I didn't say Carter could have stopped it, or should take the blame, just why what's his face blamed him.
 

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,497
436
126
Indeed, but you know, we couldn't let them nationalize that oil.
Yeah who did they think they were? Obviously since they weren't a western nation they shouldn't have been so stupid as to expect any control over resources in their borders.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY