You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Interpreting Ahmadinejad’s Anti-Zionist Comments
2005-11-12
Excerpt:

openDemocracy (Nov 3) focused on a “clash of perceptions” between the U.S. and Iran with Ahmadinejad’s comments seen as exacerbating an already tense context. The crux of it is that the U.S. has long regarded Iran as the “serious problem” in the Middle East and had hoped to contain Iranian ambitions with success in Iraq. Failing in Iraq and failing the prospect of establishing actual “regime change” in Iran, the U.S. views it as unacceptable that Iran should develop a nuclear capability. Hence the ongoing efforts to bring Iran before the U.N. security council. This clashes with Iran’s perception that it has every right to develop its nuclear capability viewing itself as one of the “great states” with over 4,000 years of civilization. As the author notes: “This view [of their right to develop nuclear energy] is reinforced by more recent developments: Iran has seen regimes to its east (Afghanistan) and west (Iraq) destroyed by a superpower that describes it as “evil”, permanent US bases being constructed in these neighbouring states, and its entire coastline effectively dominated by the US fifth fleet.”
That might indeed explain their actions -- the Mad Mullahs™ are not stupid. They do indeed see the U.S. as a threat to them -- because we are. Too bad you didn't quote the rest of the article, because there is a clear and succient description of why we're giving Iran the gimlet eye. It's encompassed in the phrase, "axis of evil."

The Mad Mullahs™ are evil. They debase their religion, they oppress their people, and they threaten the entire region. They want to do even more than that, and they will if they get nuclear weapons. The writer offers up some of the Iranian responses should a war occur between the U.S. and Teheran: getting Hezbollah to act up in Iraq (yeah, that'll scare us) or closing the Straits of Hormuz (yeah, they'll get sympathy on the world stage for choking off the oil). But this assumes we're going to go to war against an entire country.

We won't. The problem isn't the people of Iran -- they're as decent and likable folk as you'll find anywhere. The problem is the Mad Mullahs™. That's a solvable problem. Think about it.

In the meantime, the writer offers the usual pablum about how everything the U.S. does only makes things worse, so we should just slink away and mind our betters. Pheh.
Posted by:willtotruth

#19  Methinks compulsiontobabble.
Posted by: .com   2005-11-12 22:32  

#18  There seems to be a hetrodyne on top of that TRANZI signal. I couldn't copy a bit of it, it's just one big whine and squeal.
Posted by: Sock Puppet O´ Doom   2005-11-12 22:16  

#17  willtoignornance? LOL
Posted by: Frank G   2005-11-12 22:13  

#16  yawn. Did you say something?
Posted by: 2b   2005-11-12 22:06  

#15  Sinktrap? This kind of LLL hatred of Ameroca can't be reasoned with.

Truth you say? LOL
Posted by: SR-71   2005-11-12 22:03  

#14  ROFL.
Posted by: .com   2005-11-12 21:58  

#13  Amusing bunch indeed. Killing in the name of peace and democracy - the American motto. Threaten the entire region .... . No that would be the U.S., Israel and their respective nuclear arsenals and their insistence on destroying entire cultures. If the clerics are solvable it isn't something Iran needs done the good ol U.S.A. way. Its own democratic roots can do fine without that kind of help. You know, like how they helped "solve" the problem of Iranian democracy in the 50s. The Lancet study had no problems - just wide margins of error typical of such a methodology. Even on the outside, it still leaves tens of thousands pointlessly dead for a big fat collection of lies. Iraq is Iran's neighbour. The U.S. has been wanting a piece of it for years. But, of course, you knew this well before Ahmadinejad came along right? Dolt? Wrong. Debunked? Wrong. Yes, let's brag about just how much more killing America could commit. While we're at it lets talk about its violations of the same NPT Iran has honoured. I want the Lancet study to be true? Wrong. It just points to numbers others don't want to be true. Debunked, so many times? By you and your buddies I presume. (i.e., you said nothing). Who exactly is dominating the Middle East? Iran you say? Hell bent on doing what America is actually doing. Get your facts and your rhetoric straight gents. America is a wonderful place full of truly wonderful people. Most of whom continue to maintain a willtoignornance unprecedented when it comes to knowing or caring about its actual foreign actions. Great people. Hideous foreign actions. But that much must be obvious even to you folk.
Posted by: willtotruth   2005-11-12 21:54  

#12  Don't feed the trolls!
Posted by: Jim   2005-11-12 20:51  

#11  Have you ever noticed how guys with nics like "willtotruth" and "king of tolerance," are usually humorless ideologues who are all convinced that the US is the _worst_country_ever_? If I wasn't in such a good mood, I'd mess with him a little.
Posted by: 11A5S   2005-11-12 19:49  

#10  Interpreting Ahmadinejad’s Anti-Zionist Comments

Save the conversion from Farsi, what other "interpretation" is needed? The meaning is more than clear. Iran is a genocidal regime hell bent on dominating the entire Middle East with their corrupt vision of theocratic dictatorship. Its Arabic neighbors are so obsessively anti-American that none of them can redirect their microscopic attention spans over to considering just what Iran's military ascension holds in store for them.
Posted by: Zenster   2005-11-12 18:00  

#9  willto"truth" WANTS that study to be true. It wants us to be the bogeyman/badman due to hate for America. That study has been debunked so many times, and puhleaze! Citing Juan "I hate Amerikkka" Cole as an expert? You're, like, 2002. Bet you fell behind in school too, huh?
Posted by: Frank G   2005-11-12 16:43  

#8  Oh puh-lease 'willtotruth', that Lancet 'study' has been thoroughly debunked.

It totally cracks me up when people say America is doing most of the killing. What about the suicide bombers (imported drones from Saudi, Syria and elsewhere), the beheadings and all the killing of people waiting to get a job.

Dolt.

If you want to know what sort of killing America is capable of, Google "Trident D5 Ohio", and then figure that launching all those missiles (from one boat) would cost less than a weeks worth of the day-to-day cost of being in Iraq.
Posted by: Tony (UK)   2005-11-12 16:23  

#7  Uhmm... We're not in Ahmadinejad's country...
unless you've already accepted some heretofore unknown redrawing of borders...
Posted by: Dishman   2005-11-12 15:31  

#6  oh for goodness' sake - learn to use Google and find out all the problems with that so-called study.
Posted by: too true   2005-11-12 15:23  

#5  What part of Death to America don't we understand?

The part where it is America actually doing most of the killing.

What part of "get out of my country" don't we understand?

US Has Killed 100,000 in Iraq: The Lancet
by Juan Cole
Posted by: willtotruth   2005-11-12 15:11  

#4  Ed.. you got that right.
Posted by: 2b   2005-11-12 12:18  

#3  a series of misbehavior by a puny "state" will ineveitably bring repercussions: financially, politically, and militarily. How's that Iranian stock market, putzhead?
Posted by: Frank G   2005-11-12 11:39  

#2  What part of Death to America don't we understand?
Posted by: ed   2005-11-12 10:36  

#1  Iran has seen regimes to its east (Afghanistan) and west (Iraq) destroyed by a superpower that describes it as “evil”, permanent US bases being constructed in these neighbouring states, and its entire coastline effectively dominated by the US fifth fleet.”

Uh...I seem to remember a little incident in 1979 "the prez" participated in. I also remember a little incident in Beirut in 1983 sponsored by Iran. I don't think it's a clash of perceptions.
Posted by: anymouse   2005-11-12 09:57  

00:00