Would an Iran with Moussavi at the helm look different?

TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- He's been labeled by many as the "reformist," a man who can take Iran beyond the truculent anti-Western rhetoric of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

So, when Iran's government announced over the weekend that Mir Hossein Moussavi had lost in his bid to become the country's next president, young Iranians took to the streets by the thousands alleging ballot fraud.

Thousands of others around the globe championed the cause on social-networking Web sites and agreed to wear green on Monday in solidarity with Moussavi's supporters.

But what is often lost in the outrage is whether Iran would look different under a Moussavi presidency.

Source

Well this is very interesting. I think I may have found a un-biased article by CNN, that's a first.

I very much enjoy this article, they have made alot of good points as to what kind of President Mousavi would have been, or perhaps will be if this dissent continues among the youth in Iran.

Among the differences state in the article:

While the president calls the Holocaust a myth, Moussavi has condemned the killing of Jews.

While Ahmadinejad has unleashed the morality police to ensure that women cover their hair in public, Moussavi has pledged his support for women's rights.

This seems like a step forward in Iranian politics with Mousavi, mind you it could simply be empty promises, but to say it in public, the defending of women is very good IMO.

"And now he's being faced with the question: Should he unleash the young people out onto the streets who supported him -- thus threatening the very system that he fought for?"

This is very serious question, he has the power to do. His followers seem very intent on getting what they want and hang on his every word.

I guess time will tell.

Any thoughts?

~Keeper

Heres a reply from another thread I saw so I will copy and paste it for you.

I was at the Iranian embassy for the elections and filmed a bit and talked to a few people.
I asked one guy who he voted for and asked him if he expects any change for Iran if the guy got in.
He shrugged and said maybe.
I asked him if the other guy won could he expect any changes.
He said maybe again.
The feeling I got was they don't have alot of hope no matter who wins.

Then I got kicked off the sidewalk by a cop.

this is what I see from the man:

He, like most Iranians in power, does not believe in the existence of Israel. He defended the taking of hostages at the U.S. Embassy in Iran in 1979, which led to the break in ties between the countries.

CNN

I guess better is a very relative term.

reply to post by mrmonsoon


I can agree, he does however condemn the killing of jews over the issue, so at least he would be looking for a diplomatic solution VS a military one.

~Keeper

I don't think it really matters who's "at the helm", because the Ayatollah is the one who's driving the ship.

The Iranian president isn't much more than a mask worn by the Ayatollah. The public face of the man behind the curtains.

Moussavi is a murderer, he personally ordered the executions of tens of thousands of political dissenters and prisoners from about 1980 to 1982. One of these episodes in 1982 involved about 17,000 prisoners at one time.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss is right. This is all starting to smell like Iraq.

Mousavi was Prime Minister during the cultural revolution. He was Prime Minister when a lot of the laws people are rallying against were enacted. Some might say that makes him responsible for those laws, what with being Prime Minister and campaigning for them and all.

Funny how no one wants to remember that, or all the things that happened under his watch between 1981 and 1989. Check his wiki page: it's all been neatly scrubbed up, as though he had done nothing of note until this past year.

This is a coup attempt: the same style that happened in Venezuela a few years back, with better tech. See: The Revolution Will Not Be Televised. Google it.

I think it would be easier with Moussavi at the helm because Obama could deal with him a little easier. Our Obama talking to their Obama. But really there would be as much change in policy as there is here.

Originally posted by Oatmeal
I think it would be easier with Moussavi at the helm because Obama could deal with him a little easier. Our Obama talking to their Obama. But really there would be as much change in policy as there is here.

What possible reason do you have to believe that?

99% of the people on this board didn't even know this guy's bloody name two weeks ago, and now he's Obama 2.0? Because he used the word "Change" in his campaign?

#1 Because we know what Amedinejad is like...

#2 Because this guy has a track record and even though it isnt great we have an idea what to expect from him...

#3 Because Moussavi says he does not believe the Jews should be killed...

#4 Because Moussavi is their change candidate...

#5 Because Mousavi could have mellowed with age...

#6 Because almost anyone would be better to deal with than Amedinejad...

the only people allowed to run for office in iran are those who the ayatollah allows to run. they are all cut from the same cloth.

to think there would be a 'real' difference is silly.

the only way iran will see any 'real' change is if the ayatollah(s) are removed from power.

that is something i do not see happening any time soon.

Exactly, that is why in answering the question posed in the thread, I said maybe Obama might find negotiating with Moussavi easier than with Amedinejad, but real change won't happen...

"outlook is cloudy" yeah no Mousavi would be a less hardline Amenijad (i know the names arent right" ... come on look at the country this is iran and for about 40 years they have been crying death to america... oh yeah and for some of those years mousavi was in charge ....? maybe look at the Ayatollahs... Khomeni now theres the real ass on the donkeys face. this guy has been telling iran what to do since he was in diapers (figurative)