This is the kind of speech and man that makes my blood boil. It's hatred responding to another hatred. Netanyahu has been pushing for a military option against Iran for a while now, he's a poster boy for the neocons in Tel Aviv. Hopefully it won't work. But let's say a country close to Morocco, arming itself with nuclear weapons and vowing to destroy us, to erase us, how would we react ? There's no military option here, nuclear weapons are a deterent, an expensive one at that, it's not supposed to be used. Ahmadinejad should polish his speech, warmongers like Netanyahu do not materialize out of thin air, something brings them out, things like "Israel will be erased off the map"...
many, many years ago... Algeria said it would hit the largest cities in Morocco and Tangier was one of them (I lived there most of my life). We were so curious that we tried to tune to algerian radio to hear what they were saying about us. But there was no fear. why? because the government didn't make a big fuss out of it. Here we are experiencing something different. They are using fear as a means to influence people. So far who wants to attack who? I read today that Israel was supposed to have attacked Syria during the August war. Iran was backstage all the time. After North Korea told washington: "I got nukes, man, so what? kiss my asian arse!" and nothing happened! then Iran came forward! it is true having nukes is a deterrent! so why are people worried about Iran when Olmert admitted they have nukes?
Riffman, those in charge aren't really worried, they're just using this to play politics, mobilize their electorate or simply to cover a hidden agenda.
Either way it seems Washington has already come to terms with a nuclear Iran, just as they did with nuclear Korea. The technology was bound to be available to everyone sooner or later. I assume when the first rifles were sold to "savages", the same rhetoric took place, "ooh ! what if they turn them against us ?!!"
We need to be level headed on these issues, is that too much to ask ? Specially when issues of religion are involved ? Ahmadinejad is trying to become some sort of Che Guevara of muslims, standing up against the imperialo-zionist, protecting muslims against whatever the hell they hate or are afraid of.
Who's going to protect Iraqis from the Iranians when the US leaves ?
Chelhman, Eevrybody wants to be the Muslim CheGuevara, Kaddafi tried and got busted. Saddam too! Nasrallah as well, but that's ephemeric. Who will protect Iraqis? the only one who can protect them is tehmeselves alone, no one will. neither saudi arabia nor iran nor syria nor the US. The conflict today is not sectarian nor religious, that is what the news try to show us. By creating this idea of sectarian, religious civil war will only help the public beleive that the US presence is as policemen not as an invader.
I know that Riffman, I'm not saying that the US is protecting anything but Iran is going to meddle into Irak when they leave, that's a certainty. Either militarily or through their Shia proxy. The US, in invading, delivered Irak into Iran's hands. I would venture to predict that within the next ten years, the whole map of that area is going to be re-drawn, and Iran will come out winning territories or at the very least gain a greater sphere of influence.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/21/2006 04:27 by chelhman.
Chelhman, I think I am getting your point. "the great persian empire" is that what you think Iran is planning? I don't see Iran having borders with Saudi Arabia. On the other hand we mainly see countries being divided during this last decade or more. If this happened it will be swimming against the tide. Iran having an influence on the Shias in Iraq is normal. isn't Israel meddling with the US politics? doesn't Syria have an influence on Lebanon? the middleeastern map has already been redrawn, now we just need to print it. There is today a cold war on who is who in the middle east. The two powers confronted with the supremacy are Israel and Iran. This will take us back to the old times of the cold war. Israel has admitted the WMD, now imagine if tomorrow Iran says they acquired some! definetly the middleeast will chance. to the best or worse, only time will tell.
A nuclear Iran = A nuclear Gulf, Saudi Arabia, Dubai, Oman, Qatar, etc... Ahmadinejad is a domestic failure for Iran. No wonder he wants a nuclear bomb, it is his best insurance that the extremists stay in power. Remember, extremists feed extremists, Netanyahu needs Ahmadinejad and vice versa. Iran has no chance of erasing Israel off of the map or anybody else for that matter. If she launches one missile, she will get in return 200. How about working on improving the life of Iranians? They're starting to turn to moderates by the way the latest I heard...
Ahmadinajad has just lost the local elections to the more moderate opposition.Which shows Iranians'discontent with him. Personally I think that whenever a leader is unable to tackle domestic problems he clings to foreign issues like starting a confrontation with the West. Iran will not benefit from this situation, they will pay a heavy price for that. Ahmadinajad talks like an engaged university student not like a president. He is a liability to his country. As to dreams about the Persian empire it seems to me that the US would love to see Arabs get in direct conflict again with Iran for fear that they will be invaded. I don't think we should fall in this trap. It is in our interest to have peaceful relations with Iran.
The idea that 2 neighbors use nuke weapon to attack each other sound very scary, if you attack you neighbor you will be affected too (in some way) specially the case of Israel and Iran geographically they are very close if we talk about the power of the actual nuke bomb (not the one dropped on Japan in WW2) certainly it will affect (not as a crises only but as nuke radiation will spread everywhere) the whole region without exception. Israel arrogance blinds it from reasoning., it is playing a nusty game by neither confirming nor denying ( but quite sure it do have it) the possession of WMD it is psychological threat but most the time this dirty game leads to crises. the other hand the Iranian president useless speeches and comments has not purpose beside feeding the US policy against Iran.
chargement...
