[b]TEXT[/b]

[b]President Ahmadinejad's Letter to President Bush[/b]

Quote:

--------------------

" [b]Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran[/b]

[b]In the Name of God, Most Merciful, Most Compassionate.[/b]

May 7, 2006

Mr George Bush, President of the United States of America

For sometime now I have been thinking, how one can justify the undeniable contradictions that exist in the international arena -- which are being constantly debated, specially in political forums and amongst university students. Many questions remain unanswered. These have prompted me to discuss some of the contradictions and questions, in the hopes that it might bring about an opportunity to redress them.

Can one be a follower of Jesus Christ (Peace be upon him), the great Messenger of God, Feel obliged to respect human rights, Present liberalism as a civilization model, Announce one’s opposition to the proliferation of nuclear weapons and WMDs, Make “War and Terror” his slogan, And finally,

Work towards the establishment of a unified international community – a community which Christ and the virtuous of the Earth will one day govern, But at the same time, Have countries attacked; The lives, reputations and possessions of people destroyed and on the slight chance of the … of a … criminals in a village city, or convoy for example the entire village, city or convey set ablaze. Or because of the possibility of the existence of WMDs in one country, it is occupied, around one hundred thousand people killed, its water sources, agriculture and industry destroyed, close to 180,000 foreign troops put on the ground, sanctity of private homes of citizens broken, and the country pushed back perhaps fifty years. At what price? Hundreds of billions of dollars spent from the treasury of one country and certain other countries and tens of thousands of young men and women – as occupation troops – put in harms way, taken away from family and love ones, their hands stained with the blood of others, subjected to so much psychological pressure that everyday some commit suicide ant those returning home suffer depression, become sickly and grapple with all sorts of aliments; while some are killed and their bodies handed of their families.

On the pretext of the existence of WMDs, this great tragedy came to engulf both the peoples of the occupied and the occupying country. Later it was revealed that no WMDs existed to begin with. Of course Saddam was a murderous dictator. But the war was not waged to topple him, the announced goal of the war was to find and destroy weapons of mass destruction. He was toppled along the way towards another goal, nevertheless the people of the region are happy about it. I point out that throughout the many years of the … war on Iran Saddam was supported by the West.

Mr President,

You might know that I am a teacher. My students ask me how can theses actions be reconciled with the values outlined at the beginning of this letter and duty to the tradition of Jesus Christ (Peace be upon him), the Messenger of peace and forgiveness. There are prisoners in Guantanamo Bay that have not been tried, have no legal representation, their families cannot see them and are obviously kept in a strange land outside their own country. There is no international monitoring of their conditions and fate. No one knows whether they are prisoners, POWs, accused or criminals.

European investigators have confirmed the existence of secret prisons in Europe too. I could not correlate the abduction of a person, and him or her being kept in secret prisons, with the provisions of any judicial system. For that matter, I fail to understand how such actions correspond to the values outlined in the beginning of this letter, i.e. the teachings of Jesus Christ (Peace be upon him), human rights and liberal values.

Young people, university students and ordinary people have many questions about the phenomenon of Israel. I am sure you are familiar with some of them. Throughout history many countries have been occupied, but I think the establishment of a new country with a new people, is a new phenomenon that is exclusive to our times.

Students are saying that sixty years ago such a country did no exist. They show old documents and globes and say try as we have, we have not been able to find a country named Israel. I tell them to study the history of WWI and II. One of my students told me that during WWII, which more than tens of millions of people perished in, news about the war, was quickly disseminated by the warring parties. Each touted their victories and the most recent battlefront defeat of the other party. After the war, they claimed that six million Jews had been killed. Six million people that were surely related to at least two million families.

Again let us assume that these events are true. Does that logically translate into the establishment of the state of Israel in the Middle East or support for such a state? How can this phenomenon be rationalised or explained?

Mr President,

I am sure you know how – and at what cost – Israel was established: - Many thousands were killed in the process. - Millions of indigenous people were made refugees. - Hundred of thousands of hectares of farmland, olive plantations, towns and villages were destroyed.

This tragedy is not exclusive to the time of establishment; unfortunately it has been ongoing for sixty years now. A regime has been established which does not show mercy even to kids, destroys houses while the occupants are still in them, announces beforehand its list and plans to assassinate Palestinian figures and keeps thousands of Palestinians in prison. Such a phenomenon is unique – or at the very least extremely rare – in recent memory.

Another big question asked by people is why is this regime being supported? Is support for this regime in line with the teachings of Jesus Christ or Moses (Peace be upon them) or liberal values? Or are we to understand that allowing the original inhabitants of these lands – inside and outside Palestine – whether they are Christian, Muslim or Jew, to determine their fate, runs contrary to principles of democracy, human rights and the teachings of prophets? If not, why is there so much opposition to a referendum?

The newly elected Palestinian administration recently took office. All independent observes have confirmed that this government represents the electorate. Unbelievingly, they have put the elected government under pressure and have advised it to recognise the Israeli regime, abandon the struggle and follow the programs of the previous government.

If the current Palestinian government had run on the above platform, would the Palestinian people have voted for it? Again, can such position taken in opposition to the Palestinian government be reconciled with the values outlined earlier? The people are also saying “why are all UNSC resolutions in condemnation of Israel vetoed?”

Mr President,

As you are well aware, I live amongst the people and am in constant contact with them -- many people from around the Middle East manage to contact me as well. They dot not have faith in these dubious policies either. There is evidence that the people of the region are becoming increasingly angry with such policies. It is not my intention to pose to many questions, but I need to refer to other points as well.

Why is it that any technological and scientific achievement reached in the Middle East regions is translated into and portrayed as a threat to the Zionist regime? Is not scientific R&D one of the basic rights of nations?

You are familiar with history. Aside from the Middle Ages, in what other point in history has scientific and technical progress been a crime? Can the possibility of scientific achievements being utilised for military purposes be reason enough to oppose science and technology altogether? If such a supposition is true, then all scientific disciplines, including physics, chemistry, mathematics, medicine, engineering, etc. must be opposed.

Lies were told in the Iraqi matter. What was the result? I have no doubt that telling lies is reprehensible in any culture, and you do not like to be lied to.

Mr President,

Don’t Latin Americans have the right to ask, why their elected governments are being opposed and coup leaders supported? Or, why must they constantly be threatened and live in fear?

The people of Africa are hardworking, creative and talented. They can play an important and valuable role in providing for the needs of humanity and contribute to its material and spiritual progress. Poverty and hardship in large parts of Africa are preventing this from happening. Don’t they have the right to ask why their enormous wealth – including minerals – is being looted, despite the fact that they need it more than others? Again, do such actions correspond to the teachings of Christ and the tenets of human rights?

The brave and faithful people of Iran too have many questions and grievances, including: the coup d’etat of 1953 and the subsequent toppling of the legal government of the day, opposition to the Islamic revolution, transformation of an Embassy into a headquarters supporting, the activities of those opposing the Islamic Republic (many thousands of pages of documents corroborates this claim), support for Saddam in the war waged against Iran, the shooting down of the Iranian passenger plane, freezing the assets of the Iranian nation, increasing threats, anger and displeasure vis-à-vis the scientific and nuclear progress of the Iranian nation (just when all Iranians are jubilant and collaborating their country’s progress), and many other grievances that I will not refer to in this letter.

Mr President,

September Eleven was a horrendous incident. The killing of innocents is deplorable and appalling in any part of the world. Our government immediately declared its disgust with the perpetrators and offered its condolences to the bereaved and expressed its sympathies.

All governments have a duty to protect the lives, property and good standing of their citizens. Reportedly your government employs extensive security, protection and intelligence systems – and even hunts its opponents abroad. September eleven was not a simple operation. Could it be planned and executed without coordination with intelligence and security services – or their extensive infiltration? Of course this is just an educated guess. Why have the various aspects of the attacks been kept secret? Why are we not told who botched their responsibilities? And, why aren’t those responsible and the guilty parties identified and put on trial? All governments have a duty to provide security and peace of mind for their citizens. For some years now, the people of your country and neighbours of world trouble spots do not have peace of mind. After 9.11, instead of healing and tending to the emotional wounds of the survivors and the American people – who had been immensely traumatised by the attacks – some Western media only intensified the climates of fear and insecurity – some constantly talked about the possibility of new terror attacks and kept the people in fear. Is that service to the American people? Is it possible to calculate the damages incurred from fear and panic? American citizen lived in constant fear of fresh attacks that could come at any moment and in any place. They felt insecure in the streets, in their place of work and at home. Who would be happy with this situation? Why was the media, instead of conveying a feeling of security and providing peace of mind, giving rise to a feeling of insecurity?

Some believe that the hype paved the way – and was the justification – for an attack on Afghanistan. Again I need to refer to the role of media. In media charters, correct dissemination of information and honest reporting of a story are established tenets. I express my deep regret about the disregard shown by certain Western media for these principles. The main pretext for an attack on Iraq was the existence of WMDs. This was repeated incessantly – for the public to, finally, believe – and the ground set for an attack on Iraq. Will the truth not be lost in a contrive and deceptive climate? Again, if the truth is allowed to be lost, how can that be reconciled with the earlier mentioned values? Is the truth known to the Almighty lost as well?

Mr President,

In countries around the world, citizens provide for the expenses of governments so that their governments in turn are able to serve them. The question here is “what has the hundreds of billions of dollars, spent every year to pay for the Iraqi campaign, produced for the citizens?”

As your Excellency is aware, in some states of your country, people are living in poverty. Many thousands are homeless and unemployment is a huge problem. Of course these problems exist – to a larger or lesser extent – in other countries as well. With these conditions in mind, can the gargantuan expenses of the campaign – paid from the public treasury – be explained and be consistent with the aforementioned principles?

What has been said, are some of the grievances of the people around the world, in our region and in your country. But my main contention – which I am hoping you will agree to some of it – is:

Those in power have specific time in office, and do not rule indefinitely, but their names will be recorded in history and will be constantly judged in the immediate and distant futures.

The people will scrutinize our presidencies.

Did we manage to bring peace, security and prosperity for the people or insecurity and unemployment? Did we intend to establish justice, or just supported especial interest groups, and by forcing many people to live in poverty and hardship, made a few people rich and powerful – thus trading the approval of the people and the Almighty with theirs’? Did we defend the rights of the underprivileged or ignore them?

Did we defend the rights of all people around the world or imposed wars on them, interfered illegally in their affairs, established hellish prisons and incarcerated some of them? Did we bring the world peace and security or raised the specter of intimidation and threats? Did we tell the truth to our nation and others around the world or presented an inverted version of it? Were we on the side of people or the occupiers and oppressors? Did our administration set out to promote rational behaviour, logic, ethics, peace, fulfilling obligations, justice, service to the people, prosperity, progress and respect for human dignity or the force of guns.

Intimidation, insecurity, disregard for the people, delaying the progress and excellence of other nations, and trample on people’s rights? And finally, they will judge us on whether we remained true to our oath of office – to serve the people, which is our main task, and the traditions of the prophets – or not?

Mr President,

How much longer can the world tolerate this situation? Where will this trend lead the world to? How long must the people of the world pay for the incorrect decisions of some rulers? How much longer will the specter of insecurity – raised from the stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction – hunt the people of the world? How much longer will the blood of the innocent men, women and children be spilled on the streets, and people’s houses destroyed over their heads? Are you pleased with the current condition of the world? Do you think present policies can continue?

If billions of dollars spent on security, military campaigns and troop movement were instead spent on investment and assistance for poor countries, promotion of health, combating different diseases, education and improvement of mental and physical fitness, assistance to the victims of natural disasters, creation of employment opportunities and production, development projects and poverty alleviation, establishment of peace, mediation between disputing states and distinguishing the flames of racial, ethnic and other conflicts were would the world be today? Would not your government, and people be justifiably proud? Would not your administration’s political and economic standing have been stronger? And I am most sorry to say, would there have been an ever increasing global hatred of the American governments?

Mr President,

it is not my intention to distress anyone. If prophet Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Ishmael, Joseph or Jesus Christ (Peace be upon him) were with us today, how would they have judged such behaviour? Will we be given a role to play in the promised world, where justice will become universal and Jesus Christ (Peace be upon him) will be present? Will they even accept us?

My basic question is this: Is there no better way to interact with the rest of the world? Today there are hundreds of millions of Christians, hundreds of millions of Moslems and millions of people who follow the teachings of Moses (Peace be upon him). All divine religions share and respect on word and that is “monotheism” or belief in a single God and no other in the world. The holy Koran stresses this common word and calls on an followers of divine religions and says:

[3.64] Say: O followers of the Book! Come to an equitable proposition between us and you that we shall not serve any but Allah and (that) we shall not associate aught. With Him and (that) some of us shall not take others for lords besides Allah, but if they turn back, then say: Bear witness that we are Muslims. (The Family of Imran).

Mr President,

According to divine verses, we have all been called upon to worship one God and follow the teachings of divine prophets.

“To worship a God which is above all powers in the world and can do all He pleases.” “The Lord which knows that which is hidden and visible, the past and the future, knows what goes on in the Hearts of His servants and records their deeds.” “The Lord who is the possessor of the heavens and the earth and all universe is His court” “planning for the universe is done by His hands, and gives His servants the glad tidings of mercy and forgiveness of sins”. “He is the companion of the oppressed and the enemy of oppressors”. “He is the Compassionate, the Merciful”. “He is the recourse of the faithful and guides them towards the light from darkness”. “He is witness to the actions of His servants”, “He calls on servants to be faithful and do good deeds, and asks them to stay on the path of righteousness and remain steadfast”. “Calls on servants to heed His prophets and He is a witness to their deeds.” “A bad ending belongs only to those who have chosen the life of this world and disobey Him and oppress His servants”. And “A good and eternal paradise belong to those servants who fear His majesty and do not follow their lascivious selves.”

We believe a return to the teachings of the divine prophets is the only road leading to salvations. I have been told that Your Excellency follows the teachings of Jesus (Peace be upon him), and believes in the divine promise of the rule of the righteous on Earth. We also believe that Jesus Christ (Peace be upon him) was one of the great prophets of the Almighty. He has been repeatedly praised in the Koran. Jesus (Peace be upon him) has been quoted in Koran as well;

[19,36] And surely Allah is my Lord and your Lord, therefore serves Him; this is the right path, Marium.

Service to and obedience of the Almighty is the credo of all divine messengers. The God of all people in Europe, Asia, Africa, America, the Pacific and the rest of the world is one. He is the Almighty who wants to guide and give dignity to all His servants. He has given greatness to Humans.

We again read in the Holy Book: “The Almighty God sent His prophets with miracles and clear signs to guide the people and show them divine signs and purity them from sins and pollutions. And He sent the Book and the balance so that the people display justice and avoid the rebellious.”

All of the above verses can be seen, one way or the other, in the Good Book as well. Divine prophets have promised:

The day will come when all humans will congregate before the court of the Almighty, so that their deeds are examined. The good will be directed towards Haven and evildoers will meet divine retribution. I trust both of us believe in such a day, but it will not be easy to calculate the actions of rulers, because we must be answerable to our nations and all others whose lives have been directly or indirectly effected by our actions. All prophets, speak of peace and tranquillity for man – based on monotheism, justice and respect for human dignity.

Do you not think that if all of us come to believe in and abide by these principles, that is, monotheism, worship of God, justice, respect for the dignity of man, belief in the Last Day, we can overcome the present problems of the world – that are the result of disobedience to the Almighty and the teachings of prophets – and improve our performance? Do you not think that belief in these principles promotes and guarantees peace, friendship and justice? Do you not think that the aforementioned written or unwritten principles are universally respected? Will you not accept this invitation? That is, a genuine return to the teachings of prophets, to monotheism and justice, to preserve human dignity and obedience to the Almighty and His prophets?

Mr President,

History tells us that repressive and cruel governments do not survive. God has entrusted The fate of man to them. The Almighty has not left the universe and humanity to their own devices. Many things have happened contrary to the wishes and plans of governments. These tell us that there is a higher power at work and all events are determined by Him. Can one deny the signs of change in the world today? Is this situation of the world today comparable to that of ten years ago? Changes happen fast and come at a furious pace.

The people of the world are not happy with the status quo and pay little heed to the promises and comments made by a number of influential world leaders. Many people around the world feel insecure and oppose the spreading of insecurity and war and do not approve of and accept dubious policies. The people are protesting the increasing gap between the haves and the have-nots and the rich and poor countries.

The people are disgusted with increasing corruption. The people of many countries are angry about the attacks on their cultural foundations and the disintegration of families. They are equally dismayed with the fading of care and compassion. The people of the world have no faith in international organisations, because their rights are not advocated by these organisations. Liberalism and Western style democracy have not been able to help realize the ideals of humanity. Today these two concepts have failed. Those with insight can already hear the sounds of the shattering and fall of the ideology and thoughts of the liberal democratic systems. We increasingly see that people around the world are flocking towards a main focal point – that is the Almighty God. Undoubtedly through faith in God and the teachings of the prophets, the people will conquer their problems. My question for you is: “Do you not want to join them?”

Mr President,

Whether we like it or not, the world is gravitating towards faith in the Almighty and justice and the will of God will prevail over all things.

Peace on those who are guided.

[b]Mahmood Ahmedinajad[/b]
President of Islamic Republic of Iran "

--------------------

please put things like that as a quote. Otherwise its hard to tell if you have added any commentary or not. (same goes for everyone else... I find it harder to read quoted material if its not 'quoted'...)

*Before you click read my reply to Admin's next comment or risk being offended.*

If you're quotoing that I'm citing [url=mms://wms.dr.dk/nas01/auto/cms/Resources/dr.dk/P1/2006/01/ae4d6d95-b52e-44bb-a34c-]this video[/url]. (After a few remarks in Danish it is all in English.)

before I click, what is it about?

Maybe a quick summary for those who may not be in a position to watch the video?

It is worksafe, and it is the Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali who campaigns hard against Islamic extremism. At some point I think it does show the infamous drawings of Mohammed that provoked riots and threats and violence, so if that means you can't watch it I guess don't.

"100man" wrote:

Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali who campaigns hard against Islamic extremism

Dust, what is that?

It appears to be the eye-roll smiley

"† Don Karnage" wrote:

It appears to be the eye-roll smiley

Its that thing that women do when they dont approve.

They just roll their eyes.... and they THINK we dont see it.

We just LET them think we dont.

A summery for the above letter:

Quote:

Dear Presidenta George W Bush Jnr,

You're a bad man... and we all know what happens to bad men... they get punished. As the first lady of the American stage Helen Hayes once said, "I'm going to kill you". Yada yada yada none existant weapons of mass destruction yada yada yada Iraq yada yada yada Guantanamo Bay yada yada yada WW2 etc etc Holy Grail so forth so forth.

Oh and Bin Laden sends his love and says "Strike me down and i shall become more powerful than you can possible imagine" i dont know what that means but he was making funny sound effects when he said that... between u and me i think he needs to lay off the dooby.

This message will self-destruct in 20 seconds.

End Transmission.

lol that's basically it.

Ahmadinejad’s a dangerous, capricious and unstable man. However I think most if not all of the things he said in his letter are complaints held by most of the arab world and probably the broader Muslim world; as well as a few which even non arab or muslim nations would agree with.

In short it's a laundry list of complaints which I think a lot of people have had on their minds for a while and have always wanted to say to America.

While on the one hand that is dangerous to US power and security since it will no doubt give Ahmadinejad a pr boost throughout very important parts of the world; it could also be useful to us if we sort out the rants from the genuine complaints and hijack the solution to them before Iran gets the opportunity to put forward its own alternative solutions.

In short play the marginalization game.

"Seraphim" wrote:

A summery for the above letter:

Quote:

Dear Presidenta George W Bush Jnr,

You're a bad man... and we all know what happens to bad men... they get punished. As the first lady of the American stage Helen Hayes once said, "I'm going to kill you". Yada yada yada none existant weapons of mass destruction yada yada yada Iraq yada yada yada Guantanamo Bay yada yada yada WW2 etc etc Holy Grail so forth so forth.

Oh and Bin Laden sends his love and says "Strike me down and i shall become more powerful than you can possible imagine" i dont know what that means but he was making funny sound effects when he said that... between u and me i think he needs to lay off the [blank].

This message will self-destruct in 20 seconds.

End Transmission.

Your summary is incorrect, in my opinion. Ahmadinejad may be a bad guy, looney or a perfectly sane person or something else. But on the basis of the letter, it is actually quite a decent document, a better summuation is what the Don labels it as 'a general laundry list of complaints against the US'.

Ahmadinejad is evil. He trains jihadi terrorists across the region, he has threatened to wipe Israel off the map and I believe he is the only world leader threatening to use nukes. His letter is irrelevant.

"100man" wrote:

Ahmadinejad is a ****. Possibly the world's most evil ****. He trains jihadi terrorists across the region, he has threatened to wipe Israel off the map and I believe he is the only world leader threatening to use nukes. I don't give a hoot what his letter says.

He does not have nukes, so cannot possibly be threatening to use them. I have not even heard any suggestion from him of using them. But then again I have not paid any real attention to the subject.

And from across the atlantic the US is not ruling out the use of nukes, and first strike. On the contrary, some media has suggested this as actually being planned as a viable scenario.

Whatever you think of Ahmedinejad, please stick to the truth, and control the language, Profanities [i]should not[/i] be tolerated.

And he is not evil. He is reactionary, and a nationalist populist (is that even a term?). He will use whatever terms he needs to to get popular Iranian support. Here he seems to be succeeding.

He has said he wants Israel wiped off the map. That is more a rallying call to gain iranian popular support than actually setting an agenda.

He is partly a reaction to international pressure. If the western world was not overbearing, I doubt he would have won the elections in the first place.

If you think he is a madman, then so be it. But even madmen can occasionally use wisdom. If his concerns are real, they should be addressed.

Afterall it was the treaty of Versailles, and a lack of addressing german concerns that lead to hitler.

We are not considering a first strike - that's nuclear language. We are leaving a preemptive attack on the table, which is non nuclear and (What is more likely) punitive air strikes on selected targets associated with the illegal iranian program.

Iran has never complied with IAEA regulations; this is just a revival (or perhaps resurfacing) of their 1998 weapons development program.

Ahmadinejad and Iran will not survive this if they control the United States or attack her allies - the concern is that it would lead to a complete breakdown in the American order of the amended twin pillars policy in the middle east. Possibly to the point of open confrontation - but certainly to a level of increased terrorism.

It's undesirable for all parties for Iran to continue - I doubt Ahmadinejad sees that, or if he does he certainly doesn't care. [url=http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=718692006]It's not entirely hopeless though[/url].

And I sincerely hope that all this sabre rattling about Israel is just political showmanship for the Muslim and Arab worlds, I can't speak for the UK but the US isn't joking about our alliance.

"Admin" wrote:

He does not have nukes, so cannot possibly be threatening to use them. I have not even heard any suggestion from him of using them. But then again I have not paid any real attention to the subject.

Apparently not.

As for the rest of your reply, Pakistani intelligence does not support your generous interpretations. [url=http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060512/ap_on_re_as/iran_pakistan_nuclear][s...

Don; some media reported the first strike scenario, which was not denied by the presidential spokesman. The ususal we do not comment on rumours stuff. It may be in planning or not.

It was suggested in a part of planning because the Iranian nuclear programme is deep underground - conventional weaponry is not thought to penetrate that far.

100 - Pakistani Intelligence also suggests Iran also has Nukes already. Rest of the world seems to disagree.

And all that article says is that That guy told Iran to threaten the US with reponding by attacking Israel. Its a bluff. Wether they can follow through is another thing.

I have no real interest in this topic however why is 100man allowed to use bad language, i dont care how much he hates the guy but why should he use it on this forum, he's breakin a rule, admin u asleep or something?

Rules apply to everyone!

Off topic i knw but had to be addressed.

Admin, nothing you are saying is substantive. What is substantive is that Ahmadinejad is pursuing nukes, a senior Pakistani officer believes he already has them, and Ahmadinejad has many times threatened to annihilate Israel, not usually with any caveat about an attack on Iran. It is really, really important he does not do that, so if he wants trouble he is going the right way about it.

"Angel" wrote:

I have no real interest in this topic however why is 100man allowed to use bad language, i dont care how much he hates the guy but why should he use it on this forum, he's breakin a rule, admin u asleep or something?

Rules apply to everyone!

Off topic i knw but had to be addressed.

Ok, I have addressed it now.

"Admin" wrote:

Don; some media reported the first strike scenario, which was not denied by the presidential spokesman. The ususal we do not comment on rumours stuff. It may be in planning or not.

It was suggested in a part of planning because the Iranian nuclear programme is deep underground - conventional weaponry is not thought to penetrate that far.

100 - Pakistani Intelligence also suggests Iran also has Nukes already. Rest of the world seems to disagree.

And all that article says is that That guy told Iran to threaten the US with reponding by attacking Israel. Its a bluff. Wether they can follow through is another thing.

It's not; it's a breach of US law and military protocol to consider a First strike on a non-nuclear nation, and unfortunately non-nuclear nations include nations that are not self declared or by an international body nuclear. And by nuclear I mean weapons systems - not power.

The only thing I can find about a US first strike is a lot of media asking if we would do it.

As for Israel I was commenting generally; this Ahmadinejad's obsession with the Holocaust, military parades and threatening language toward Israel - literally out of the blue has me confused if he is just trying to solidify muslim support behind him or if he's serious.

Iran will not be bullied by the USA or Israel. Since the Iraq fiasco the position of the Persians is strong. China and Russia are still major powers and are unlikely to sanction any military attack on Tehran. It’s all talk from Tel Aviv and Washington. Bush messed up big time with his cowboy approach.

There is a lot of hypocrisy on show. I don’t think Israel has ruled out the use of nuclear weapons if it was in their best interests. Or even admitted they have nukes for that matter.

latifah,

Are you saying you think Ahmadinejad's positions on Israel are acceptable?

I'm not sure how Tel Aviv has "bullied" Iran, or at least not undeservedly. On the converse Iran has been doing all the sabre rattling with Israel, refusing to speak to them, making all these speeches about "wiping em off the map" et al.

The Knesset is in Jerusalem.

My country does not recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

All the same it makes no sense to talk of policies coming from Tel Aviv.

Hi,

What is it with this blindness that people seem inflicted with.

Bush sends troops around the world "pillaging and plundering" in the name of "F.....R.....E.....E.....D.....O.....M". Kills or instigates the murder of 100s, of thousands of men women and children. Has the biggest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world, constantly uses that and his military and economic power to "beat" countries into submission, supports and drives crack pot regimes / governments, (and I mean by not condeming them he condones them) and contravenes international law after international law. The U.S. has vast numbers of troops in the middle east and make no bones about it that is to secure the building of there oil pipe lines and prop up "friendly" governments. Invades Afghanistan and Iraq has somewhere along the line and on many occasions thrown all kinds of insults and provocation at Iran supported Iraq when it was at war with Iran and helped to push the world to the brink of a nervous breakdown with his inane psychotic ramblings.

Ahmadinejad starts / continues a nuclear program that could be "wiped off the map" any time that the U.S. decided to, given its historical record for ignoring the law and common sense and the whole world is told that they should start worrying about the future of the planet.

Give us a break. Political mind games at a premium..IRAN the big bad threat. U.S. The Big Defender (all sounds so familiar).......I think not.

"100man" wrote:

latifah,

Are you saying you think Ahmadinejad's positions on Israel are acceptable?

No, I don’t like Ahmadinejad much, his views are distasteful, but I do not think he is evil either, or that he will attack nuclear armed Israel.

My point is that Iran is in a stronger position that its enemies will admit. The hints of attacks on Iran will do nothing but strengthen his position at home, especially when the Iranian people have reason to distrust the USA given its past record of overthrowing governments and supporting Iraq in the war.

China and Russia are sympathetic to Iran which further increases Ahmadinejad’s confidence. I’m not supporting his views by saying that.

"latifah" wrote:

China and Russia are sympathetic to Iran which further increases Ahmadinejad’s confidence. I’m not supporting his views by saying that.

I dopubt they are sympathetic.

What will have them concerned is losing all their mulyi billion dollar contracts.

China will know that starving it of oil is possibly the only way ro defeat it atm...

When I say sympathetic I don’t mean that they support Iran’s positions, but they do not want Iran destabilised and the oil flow stopped.

China and Russia are big players in this game and they cannot be ignored by the US and Israel.