Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

Iran Petition

This thread is sponsored by:
Announcements Posted on
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    This petition calls upon the government to implement significant, direct sanctions on the Islamic Republic of Iran in order to force them to reveal the true intent of their nuclear programme and adhere to the relevant articles of international law that they are currently flouting
    • 32 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tuzz375)
    This petition calls upon the government to implement significant, direct sanctions on the Islamic Republic of Iran in order to force them to reveal the true intent of their nuclear programme and adhere to the relevant articles of international law that they are currently flouting
    The EU has implemented sanctions, oil.
    Sanctions to get them to the negotiating table
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Why bother, lets just wait and enjoy the fireworks when the bombs start falling.
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Yes but we need more discussion and rhetoric from world leaders denouncing Tehran and pressurising them to change course on the world stage. We need to spur the focus of the world's media on their every move. With more focus, the more pressure on Ahmadinejad we can force him to be more accountable to the international community and ultimately force him to abide by international law.
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Yeah no. The Government is already doing more than is wise to piss off the Iranians, not only on its own but in conjunction with the EU and pretty much every other international body we have any sway over. Bearing in mind that the Iranians really hate the British and that the economic well being of the civilians is not what keeps the establishment in power.
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thunder and Jazz)
    Yeah no. The Government is already doing more than is wise to piss off the Iranians, not only on its own but in conjunction with the EU and pretty much every other international body we have any sway over. Bearing in mind that the Iranians really hate the British and that the economic well being of the civilians is not what keeps the establishment in power.
    Exactly. "the economic well being of the civilians is not what keeps the establishment in power". Bringing the country to its knees through sanctions on oil from the EU is not going to stop Ahmadinejad. But direct pressure from Cameron, Obama, Sarkozy, Merkel etc etc has to be used to show that the West isn't messing about over Iran and we're not just going to let Ahmadinejad slip through our fingers just like Kim Jong-Il did all those years ago!!
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tuzz375)
    Exactly. "the economic well being of the civilians is not what keeps the establishment in power". Bringing the country to its knees through sanctions on oil from the EU is not going to stop Ahmadinejad. But direct pressure from Cameron, Obama, Sarkozy, Merkel etc etc has to be used to show that the West isn't messing about over Iran and we're not just going to let Ahmadinejad slip through our fingers just like Kim Jong-Il did all those years ago!!
    Are you serious?
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thunder and Jazz)
    Are you serious?
    A serious nut-case... I'm not even going to bother explaining to that guy how the economic climate of a country (when in turmoil) is usually the most powerful cause for political change, but maybe he can look at some historical cases...
    • 39 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    Staying out of this one as i have no grand policy.
    • 30 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    We need very strong evidence if sanctions are to be imposed on Iran. Warmongering rhetoric from American and Israel must not be believed at face value. Iran has the right to develop a domestic nuclear programme for energy purposes, but there is little evidence to suggest they have gone further and developed a nuclear weapon.

    A no for this motion until solid, UN-approved evidence exists to justify it.
    • 18 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Nah, let's just see what happens; if they get too dangerous then let's get involved...

    But anywho, I don't want to really get involved in this.
    • 49 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I don't agree with this motion given that some sanctions have yet to take effect I believe (the oil embargo for one. I may be wrong on this however). I object more to the fact that people are negging OP because they simply disagree with what he/ she is saying. Surely this is not the way to create activity within the House if every time someone new comes in they are ridiculed and negged for their opinions. While I know that you can probably not intervene, surely you agree with me that such attitudes and behaviour must stop if the HoC is ever to attract new members:

    (Original post by Metrobeans)
    QFA
    • 20 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by toronto353)
    I don't agree with this motion given that some sanctions have yet to take effect I believe (the oil embargo for one. I may be wrong on this however). I object more to the fact that people are negging OP because they simply disagree with what he/ she is saying. Surely this is not the way to create activity within the House if every time someone new comes in they are ridiculed and negged for their opinions. While I know that you can probably not intervene, surely you agree with me that such attitudes and behaviour must stop if the HoC is ever to attract new members:
    I'm not keen on people being negged for their opinions either, but I suspect the people who gave the neg reps aren't part of the HoC anyway. We have an unwritten convention that people shouldn't be negged for their opinions and for the most part, I think it's adhered to.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Metrobeans)
    I'm not keen on people being negged for their opinions either, but I suspect the people who gave the neg reps aren't part of the HoC anyway. We have an unwritten convention that people shouldn't be negged for their opinions and for the most part, I think it's adhered to.
    Actually, I'm less convinced. It's been quite apparent to me having started here on a different magic carpet that quite a lot of HoC folks are willing to wield neg on newbies in an effort to scare them away.
    • 15 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    this forum is full of warmongers.
    • 32 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cl_steele)
    this forum is full of warmongers.
    Not all of us are Warmongers.

    Some of us, like me, believe in International Diplomacy via the UN and the EU.

    On the topic of Iran:
    There was a letter from Iran which is being analyzed
    A good point recently, If Iran gets the Bomb then other States like Saudi Arabia will follow suit.
    • 15 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Morgsie)
    Not all of us are Warmongers.

    Some of us, like me believe in International Diplomacy via the UN and the EU.

    On the topic of Iran:
    There was a letter which is being analyzed
    A good point recently, If Iran gets the Bomb then other States like Saudi Arabia will follow suit.
    but what business is it of the international community least of all france the uk and the usa to lambaste another country for trying to gain nuclear weapons? we all have them and are unequally untrustworthy with them particularly the americans and their trigger happiness.
    and in relation to your direct point i doubt saudi would get the bomb they have the USA protecting them so they have no need to invest in designing one.
    • 49 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    Actually, I'm less convinced. It's been quite apparent to me having started here on a different magic carpet that quite a lot of HoC folks are willing to wield neg on newbies in an effort to scare them away.


    (Original post by Metrobeans)
    I'm not keen on people being negged for their opinions either, but I suspect the people who gave the neg reps aren't part of the HoC anyway. We have an unwritten convention that people shouldn't be negged for their opinions and for the most part, I think it's adhered to.
    Nick I'd be tempted to agree with Adorno here. A lot of members act in a derogatory manner towards new members and those that don't just end up negging new members in an attempt to get them to leave the HoC. It's a very disappointing trend, but (and I have said the equivalent of this in the survey) there is no point in trying to recruit new members for them to come here and then just end up being treated in a derogatory manner.
    • 20 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    Actually, I'm less convinced. It's been quite apparent to me having started here on a different magic carpet that quite a lot of HoC folks are willing to wield neg on newbies in an effort to scare them away.
    (Original post by toronto353)
    Nick I'd be tempted to agree with Adorno here. A lot of members act in a derogatory manner towards new members and those that don't just end up negging new members in an attempt to get them to leave the HoC. It's a very disappointing trend, but (and I have said the equivalent of this in the survey) there is no point in trying to recruit new members for them to come here and then just end up being treated in a derogatory manner.
    On neg reps, all of the negs I get in this forum are from members who aren't part of the HoC, but perhaps as HoC regulars are aware that I'm not responsible for the content of bills and motions, they know better? It's hard to be certain with negs as if you're not a sub, you can't be certain. Obviously I can't stop it, but I can make it clear to everyone that the convention of this House is that differences of opinion should be raised through debate and not negs.

    I'm not sure if the observation about members acting in a derogatory manner towards newbies falls under moderation? I've quoted in TCIT in any case, though should it be a moderation issue, I don't know whether he'd deal with it in public forum or in AAM.
    (Original post by TheCrackInTime)
    FAO
    • 49 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Metrobeans)
    I'm not sure if the observation about members acting in a derogatory manner towards newbies falls under moderation? I've quoted in TCIT in any case, though should it be a moderation issue, I don't know whether he'd deal with it in here or in AAM.
    I'd assume it would be a moderation matter. Thanks for quoting in TCIT. I'm not getting at you in any way and I'm sure that Adorno isn't, but it's a worrying trend.
Updated: February 20, 2012
New on TSR

GCSE mocks revision

Talk study tips this weekend

Article updates
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.