http://www.israelnewsagency.com/israelterrorismhaderairan661026.html
And I "thought" that these "poor" THUGS are just "freedom fighters"...

"(Iranian) President Ahmadinejad spoke at a conference in Tehran entitled, "The World Without Zionism." He said Israel should be wiped off the map as the Islamic world will not let its historic enemy live in its heartland."

And to think that many here think Iran should be permitted to have nuclear weapons!!

Baron Max

Why should the US be allowed to have nuclear weapons? They also promised to whipe out any terrorist countries.

Why should the US be allowed to have nuclear weapons? They also promised to whipe out any terrorist countries.

Yes, the nations of the world should willingly allow terrorism to thrive! We should have more terrorists and more terrorist organizations ...each vowing to wipe out some other group of people! Yeah, that's what the world needs more of, that's for sure. Let's give all terrorist organizations nukes and see what's left after the dust settles. Good idea, Spurious!!! ...LOL!

Baron Max

let's give Ahmaidihqawerobjad some nukes! he's only following Imam Goatfucker (http://www.homa.org/Details.asp?ContentID=2137352826&TOCID=2083225445)'s path of Islam and Peace

http://www.mlah.us/images/blog/050426A.jpg

this satan simply does not have the physical ability to keep the human mask on long enough. he slips it off once in a while to have a breather, where he blurts out some wisdoms

Why should the US be allowed to have nuclear weapons? They also promised to whipe out any terrorist countries. , spuriousmonkey

I hope you can see the difference. Whether you believe in the Iraq war or not, the intent was not to wipe the nation and its people off the earth. This is the intent of Iran. If anything, Israel has a right to go to war with Iran who has been waging war on them for decades.... Does not matter if you use a tank or a suicide bomber, it is still an attack

Is it possible for Iran to have a peaceful nuclear program that only generates power? If this is technically possible, it should be the incentive for them to act peacefully.

Iran can have a peaceful nuke program, if the US military will be in charge of those installations. any other way = red hot mullah (or even a President) with hot fingers and a bunch of red buttons ready to be pushed

Sharon suggested Iran be removed from the UN, is that a good idea?

Whether you believe in the Iraq war or not, the intent was not to wipe the nation and its people off the earth. This is the intent of Iran.
The words of the President of Iran have been translated variously, but all the newsagencies seem to agree that he spoke of removing "Israel" FROM THE MAP -- an entirely different thing from "off the earth".

The intent is the dissolution of the state of Israel as a national entity and the reuniting of Palestine, i.e. a restoration of the situation pre-1948. The name "Israel" should no longer be found in an atlas. In 1990, the "German Democratic Republic" was "wiped off the map" through German unification -- but it was not destroyed.

I think it amounts to the same thing.

Sharon suggested Iran be removed from the UN, is that a good idea?

Doesn't matter. The UN doesn't do anything about anything anyway!

The UN just spends lots of money and seems to have lots of meetings, but as to really doing anything ....???

Baron Max

It would be symbolic.

Sharon suggested Iran be removed from the UN, is that a good idea?

I don't see why it would be a good idea. I can only see why it would be a bad idea: less influence over Iran and making Iran an outcast isn't going to give any advantages.

Originally posted by River Ape:
The words of the President of Iran have been translated variously, but all the newsagencies seem to agree that he spoke of removing "Israel" FROM THE MAP -- an entirely different thing from "off the earth".

You must be kidding. That is a stretch if I have ever heard it. From the map does not mean going back to the 1948 borders. It means Israel no longer existing, and that can only be done by removing the Jews. If not his words, than the constant arming of Hamas and Hezbollah against Israel speak alot louder.

Big deal. Talking tough always plays well to the home crowd. If Iran chose unlimmited terrorism you would understand how much more horrible terrorism could be than anything we have seen yet. But in response to Iranian backed unlimmitted terrorism nuclear weapons would be used on Iran.

Iran, Israel and every pro Bush voter are the real axis of Evil but so what.

Originally posted by nirakar:
Talking tough always plays well to the home crowd

Responsible governments do not talk about the destruction of other countries. Even Bush won't do that.......


If Iran chose unlimmited terrorism you would understand how much more horrible terrorism could be than anything we have seen yet.

Well yes, and then it would be real easy to prove, and they rather play in stealth.


Iran, Israel and every pro Bush voter are the real axis of Evil but so what

At least Bush has not taken his own nations children and use them to blow up mines.

http://www.iranian.com/Opinion/2002/March/Faith/


Has the world forgotten that Iranian parents sent their young sons into mine fields during the war with Iraq -- not for money but for plain fanatical belief that their sons were going to become martyrs?

No freedom of speech and a virtual dictator are not the same as the United States. NO matter how much you hate Bush, let us not put them together.

Iran should be booted out of the UN, along with a bunch of other similar states. they should have no participation in decisions re: international law if their president is a fucktardomaniac.

all those dumbasses that try to analyze his sentence into nothingness, how do you think that crowd interpreted his words? "oh, let's take every single Atlas, and lots and lots of white out! hit the books biatches!" ok..

cutting off UN privilages should follow with cutting off of trade ties and diplomatic ties. let them have another revolution ... to throw off the mullahs and "exporters of the revolution"

otheadp !
I wish but the UN is hijacked by the Islamo-Arab-Oil Goliath machine.
These Arab Muslim leaders don't quite getit that Iranian theocracy's nukes, is a threat to them too.
They don't want to get it I should say.
This is what happens when the will to hate is greater than will to life.
Pathetic.
How did that great Israeli (http://all4israel.org) Woman Golda Meir said once:
"Peace will come when the Arab parents will love their children (http://www.geocities.com/palestiniansarelies/HumanShields) as much as they hate ours (http://www.pmw.org.il)".

P.S.
Please Click on the inserted links above.

I still have no problems with Iran having nukes, assuming that's what they're trying to achieve with their "peaceful nuclear program".

For those threatened by Iran, don't forget that you reap what you sow. Most people have nothing to fear from Iran. Iran started nothing, they're reacting. It's about time at least some country in the Middle East has something to defend itself from the control of the Western world.

Why aren't we worried about North Korea anymore even though they're nuclear capable now? The Western world is just upset that they'll no longer be able to bully the Middle East. It's simple as that. We really have nothing to fear from those in the Middle East. Everything that has happened to us has been reactions to our actions. Again, we reap what we sow. Maybe now that we won't be able to use such force in the Middle East, our relations can improve with one another as they were before the creation of the Israeli state. It's pretty easy to achieve peace in that region, but if you're one that supports greed, it'll never happen.

Hey, what's everyone's thoughts about us going back to our old-school warfare?


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,173626,00.html

Targeted Terrorist Assassinations Would Spare Innocent Lives

"The legislation would lift the ban on the assassination of terrorist leaders who pose a direct threat to national security, yet who have not committed a direct act of terrorism against the U.S."

More pre-emptive strikes. How fun. Gotta love the broad brush as well. C'mon, let's all do the time warp! Let's live back in the days of seeing people, even fellow Americans, getting whacked left and right. Conspiracy theorists are gonna have fun with that.

- N

Iran stages Protests (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051028/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_israel;_ylt=ArwcN4Vq0fU51FaQ.2qMxrxvaA8F;_ylu =X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA)

Poor Iranian in the hands of their Evil GOVT.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4384264.stm

isnt shooting a thin bit of cloth in the middle of a crowd a really bad idea?i very much hope they were using real bullet,the kid doesnt really look that into it.

why dont israel attack iran and finish this story once and for all? I know they are the most power full army/airforce in the middle east, what are they afraid of?

lots of people dying?even more bombs in israel?

Responsible governments do not talk about the destruction of other countries. Even Bush won't do that.......


Let's compare and contrast:
1: Iran's president calling for Israel to be removed from the map
2: Bush's axis of evil
3: Bush's and Clinton's call for and attempts at regime change
4: Pat Robertson's call to assassinate Hugo Chavez
5: American nobody dudes holding signs and calling talk shows in 1980 saying nuke Iran.

The Iranian politician has not called for genocide but given the history of Jews I will not judge Jews if they treat a call for the end of the state of Israel as being the same as a call for genocide. A call for the end of a state is more than a call for regime change.

In four of the cases the intended audience is the domestic audience and the purpose of the statements are to be punch lines at a kind of pep rally intended to increase support for an amorphous grouping of ideologies. The would be leaders need the support for these amorphous groupings of ideologies in order to keep the domestic supporters of other amorphous groupings of ideologies out of power.

In the fifth case Bush and Clinton needed congress to approve and fund their attempts at regime change.

Iran has presumably spent money to harm the government of Israel that has presumably resulted in the killing of non-combatant Israelis.

Bush and Clinton's attempts at regime change have killed many more noncombatants. Both Iran and Bush/Clinton say that the ends justify the means and if their terror accomplishes it's goals then the world would be a better place and the unfortunate innocents who had to die will be in the long run outnumbered by people who get to live or live better because of the valiant terrorism be it Hezbollah suicide bombers, a chlorine embargo on Iraq or the return of US funded death squads in Haiti. Of the three horrors I just mentioned Clinton's embargo on chlorine to Iraq was the most brutal and deadly.

The folks in 1980 yelling nuke Iran were calling for the worst horror but they had very little power and this lack of power gives them a freedom and almost a necessity to exaggerate their position just so their real feelings could be noticed. If we gave them control of the nuclear weapons most of them would choose not to nuke Iran.

Compared to the USA Iran is like the guy calling a talk show saying nuke Iran. Iran has very little real power in a confrontation with the US/UK/Israeli/Kurdish and maybe sort of Pakistani, Turkish, Azerbajani and Uzbek alliance. Iran is surrounded. If any nations ever needed nukes to defend their national security it's 1 Israel and 2 Iran. Iran tried being a liberal democracy and the USA toppled that government in 1953. Iran has it's own version of "never again".

Pat Robertson's situation is half way in between that of the Powerless American yelling nuke Iran and the Iranian president calling for Israel being erased from the map.

Bush's Axis of Evil speech was designed to get the American people to accept the NeoCon agenda which is really a cold war on the world (but particularly China) fought indirectly through the attempt to maintain bases and obedient client states around the middleast oil fields and to a lesser degree around the world.

Bush's speech was effective at achieving it's goal but in my opinion the axis of evil speech set the Neocon goals back around the world and especially set back the neocon goal of regime change in Iran. The Iranian government sucks and the Iranians know this. Iranians want to move in the direction of materialism and liberal democracy but any time the external threat seems real they rally arround their government. They know that America encouraged Saddam to attack Iran. They know that Israel (along with portions of the corporate welfare state) is the flea that wags the Neocon tail that wags the American foreign policy dog. They know that the NeoCons would replace their Islamo-fascist semi-democracy with a American controlled corporate-fascist semi-democracy/dictatorship if the neocons could.

Bush's Axis of evil speech may be more nasty and frightening than the Iranian president's "wipe Israel off the map" speech because Bush has so much more power than Iran. Bush could do something huge like invading Iraq in order to try to serve his ideology while all Iran can do is give a little money to terrorists.

My bet is that if America backed off of it's pressure on Iran and removed all traces of rhetorical and other hostility from our policies towards Iran, then the Iranian people will throw off the mullahs and become a real democracy with free speech within ten years. This does not mean that a free Iranian people would be allies with America against China or Russia or the EU or OPEC or whoever else threatens "US interests".


I don't know anything about responsible governments but Bush has threatened and done regime change. Read Michael Parenti on the break up of Yugoslavia. The USA and Germany are accused of being the architects of the erasing from the map of that nation that the UK, USA and France drew onto the map 70 years earlier. The colonial powers ended thousands of nation states. Luckily genocide was more rare.
.................................................. ..................................................

Iran is no more going to erase Israel from the map than some guy on the street corner yelling "nuke Iran" is going to Nuke Iran. But, how wrong and horrible would it be to advocate that Israel should cease to exist you were calling for a one state solution in which Israeli Jews would be treated with the same amount of rights and respect with which Israel has treated it's Israeli Arab citizens?

The original 1948 UN partition was sick because it gave the European Jewish immigrants more than 50% of the land when they were 30% of the population and owned 10% of the land. If you ethnically cleanse an area of a people who had just ethnically cleaned you out of the area in order to take possession of the area are you in the wrong?

If your great grand father was homeless and found an abandoned house in the desert and three generations of your family were raised in that house then some guy puts a gun to your head and drives your family out saying that his great great great great great grandfather had also found that house abandoned and raised generations of his family in it, and what's more his family had a legend that the dust on the floor once formed letters spelling that the builder of the house was giving the house to his family forever, then should your family not seek to find a way to have the family that took your house away removed from the house? Does it make a difference if you learn that his ancestors really did live in the house but you all turn out to be distant cousins and those ancestors were also your ancestors to whom the dust have spelled out that the house was being given forever to their family?

I don't see the Iranian President's statements as being as outrageous as the present reality of the Israeli Palestinian dispute is. His statements are just statements while the ethnic cleansing stalemate and all of it's associated terrorism in Israel/Palestine is a reality.






At least Bush has not taken his own nations children and use them to blow up mines.

http://www.iranian.com/Opinion/2002/March/Faith/



Saddam attacked Iran and thanks to the USA Iran was weaker in technology and would have lost that war if they did not use their advantages in numerical population and in dedication to the cause.

If you look at the wars between the early European Americans and the native Americans there was terrorism and their were some suicide fighters who undertook battles that they could not survive. Desperate times call for desperate measures.

As for the use of Youth I don't like it. But how young is too young? I think 18 years old is to young to sign yourself up to be an unquestioning slave to your chain of command for a few years. You should know history first and understand that you will be he the tool of your president and you should also understand that it is probable that any given president (the person you serve) of any given nation will be more lacking in moral character and will be more evil than is the average human being.



No freedom of speech and a virtual dictator are not the same as the United States. NO matter how much you hate Bush, let us not put them together.


Freedom of speech is a tool that can be used to stop people like Bush and Khomeini from maintaining their hold on power. I think they belong together. We have the freedom of speech only as long as we can keep it. It don't think Bush wants to end free speech but I think he could be led step by step into ending free speech if he could run for more terms and if 60% the people could be persuaded step by step to support increasing clamp downs on free speech.

Lying to get us into a war is not in the spirit of free speech. We don't celebrate free speech because we love the freedom to read pornography. We celebrate free speech because a vigorous debate is needed in order for democracy to govern better than dictatorships do. We have a mediocre media, a mediocre national debate and a mediocre government.

A nation that listens to people like Judith Miller egging us in to war on false pretenses doesn't have the kind of free speech that we romanticize. If you have overstayed your visa you will have problems if you speak up for Palestinians but if you have overstayed your visa and want to speak up for a Netanyahu led Israel don't worry you won't have any extra problems because of your politics.

God bless our free speech, it makes us better than Iran but it is the American people and the founding fathers rather than Bush who deserve credit for our free speech.

Originally posted by Nirakar:
1: Iran's president calling for Israel to be removed from the map
2: Bush's axis of evil
3: Bush's and Clinton's call for and attempts at regime change
4: Pat Robertson's call to assassinate Hugo Chavez
5: American nobody dudes holding signs and calling talk shows in 1980 saying nuke Iran.

Calling a country an axis of evil is not the same as calling for the destruction of a country, not even close.

Pat Robertson is not a politician and holds no government post, so who cares....

Regime change is far different from removing from the map

Who the hell cares about American nobody dudes, are you serious?


Bush and Clinton's attempts at regime change have killed many more noncombatants.

Though Bush's call to war, was indeed, ridiculous, they are not specifically targeting civilians. It is like trying to call a person who hit someone on the road by accident, and a person who deliberately shot someone the same thing. Intent means everything. The U.S. is not looking to exterminate the Iraqis, I am not sure if the same thing can be said about Iran and the jews.


Compared to the USA Iran is like the guy calling a talk show saying nuke Iran

An Iran with nuclear weapons is capable of giving a nuclear weapon to Hamas, and denying the whole thing. Though I doubt this would happen, I do not rule it out completely.


I don't see the Iranian President's statements as being as outrageous as the present reality of the Israeli Palestinian dispute is

Israel is not a threat to Iran, but to the Palestinians. There is no need for Iran to supply Hamas or Hezbollah other than to spread its power among fanatics. It is completely outrageous to call for the total destruction of another nation, no matter what the plight of the Palestinians.


Iran tried being a liberal democracy and the USA toppled that government in 1953

I have heard much said in this forum about the great Democracy of 1953. It was more like a democracy that you see in Russia, than a real one. It was another dictator waiting to happen. It was also a government that Russia was waiting to take control over, so the U.S. made a usual cold war mistake.


If you look at the wars between the early European Americans and the native Americans there was terrorism and their were some suicide fighters who undertook battles that they could not survive. Desperate times call for desperate measures

The indians never sent their children out to their deaths just to save money on removing mines. It is a callous disregard for human life, not desperation. Stop making excuses. Its insane, and fanatical. It is a testament to the mindset of that government.


Freedom of speech is a tool that can be used to stop people like Bush and Khomeini from maintaining their hold on power. I think they belong together

Though my opinion of Bush is very low, he is still not a thug who rules his country by force. I am sorry, there is not a comparison to their behaviors.

towards!
True post.