No place for Israel in Middle East, says Iran’s Ahmadinejad

[Swede]

I'm sure it must be a mistranslation.



DUBAI- Many thousands of Iranians shouted “Death to America, death to Israel” during state-organized protests on Friday and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told them there was no place for the Jewish state in a future Middle East.

Iran, penalized by tough Western sanctions, faces the threat of an Israeli or U.S. military strike on its disputed nuclear facilities. With popular uprisings reshaping the region, the Islamic Republic is also trying to prevent the overthrow of its closest Arab ally, Syrian President Bashar Assad.

“You want a new Middle East? We do too, but in the new Middle East ... there will be no trace of the American presence and the Zionists,” Ahmadinejad told worshippers at Tehran University in an event broadcast live on state television.

The Iranian leader, whose own authority is under challenge from hardliners as well as reformers, was restating Tehran’s familiar goals as the Middle East undergoes a very different upheaval from the 1979 Islamic revolution that toppled the U.S.-backed Shah and brought Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini to power.

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1243368--no-place-for-israel-in-middle-east-says-iran-s-ahmadinejad

[Scootaloo]

1. ...And?

Ahmedinejad jabbers this regularly. It's more or less his catchphrase. Has been since 2005.

What's come of his rhetoric in seven years?

Not a damn thing.

[Swede]

3. Well,don't worry about Netanyahu,either.

[Scootaloo]

4. I don't

I've been pointing out that it's just posturing on Israel's part, just as this is blathering on Ahmedinejad's part.

[Alamuti Lotus]

15. I actually don't..

for all of his verbal bombast (and the boy is full of bullshit and will spread it around to anybody who will listen, to be sure), he is effectively one of the least warlike premiers in the entire history of the failing zionist project. By contrast, most of the prominent Labor party leaders have an exponentially greater body count than all of Netanyahoo's reigns as top dog of that kennel.

Given time, I feel he may prove my statement above to be false--particularly if he gets his way with Iran, which I also doubt.

[holdencaufield]

17. ..."history of the failing zionist project"

Really? Last time I looked, Israel is still there and shows no sign of slipping into the sea. What is the "zionist project" if not the realisation of the political state of Israel as a sovereign homeland for Jews?

I know there are lots of folks who pray every night that Israel will fail, even if they won't say so openly. But, it ain't happening, Sparky.

There are lots of failed states in this world -- Israel isn't close to being one of them.

[Swede]

19. So you consider the jews dogs?

Very interesting.

[Violet_Crumble]

20. Calling someone the top dog gets that sort of ugly response?

Wow, remind me to not trot out any common phrases while yr around lest you throw more false accusations of antisemitism out there...

[Swede]

21. You forgot the kennel comment?

Or,maybe not.

[azurnoir]

32. ooooh sort of getting a bit desperate there?

Top dog of the kennel was the quote I believe it is verbal expression equating to the leader would you have preferred alpha wolf oh wait wolf pack German WW2 submarine warfare then I'd wager there would have been howling about a Nazi comparison, but at least your getting the technique down-which seems to be twisting words to avoid discussing what was actually meant by the comment

[oberliner]

33. The phrase "top dog of the kennel" gets exactly 4 hits on Google

All of them related exclusively to actual dogs.

[Alamuti Lotus]

43. did we just meet yesterday? I suppose I should explain..

or are you just now noticing that I tend to coin phrases on the fly when I write? And typically, this is for no reason beyond my own amusement or exercise. The persecution fantasies are so bloody far off the mark that it actually is very, very funny.

This is probably a futile exercise, but let me walk you through my process.

Start with "top dog"; I forget why I settled on that metaphor as a means of ending that section, but it stuck. Something about the cadence probably satisfied me. Well, kennel is a clever foil for that phrase, on a number of levels. It is evocative, but not in the shrill dulcitones as are being assumed by the snarling pack of wolves (whoops, veiled Nazi reference: invocation of Godwin's Law, I lose!!) that comprises my current fan club. It is indeed an only slightly veiled commentary upon Israel and its geopolitical status and proclivities, but not in the vein of a "descendants of pigs and monkeys" sort of comment that y'all really, really want me to be making. If I meant that, I'd have said it--you should know by now that I rarely pull punches or hide behind euphemisms when I want to say something awful. It says more about y'all than me that this is the sort of assumption you make when interpreting phrases that are absolutely unclear to you! There's people who assume the worst about things, and then there's people who run so fucking far off the deep end with their paranoia that nothing resembles its original departure point. Flush these false assumptions out of your mind, and follow me further.

What good is it to be top dog of a kennel? You're still on a short leash and more or less in a cage. Well, that is exactly my point with that little micro-reference in the first place. It is actually a devastating commentary on Israel's basic habits and preferred roles played on the global stage (a phrase that I actually dislike severely, and may revise on a future edit). Since its inception the zionist project has basically hedged its existence in large part towards being a loyal attack dog (even self-described as rabid or insane for marketing and public relations purposes, standard Mossad propaganda efforts presenting itself as possibly irrational and something to be in constant fear and awe of) for the old imperialist powers of Europe and the newer forces of arrogance that has surpassed them at the present time. This hasn't worked out too terribly well to date, and, since the patrons for this project are failing fast in terms of their eroding global power, the project itself has a limited shelf-life and a clock ticking down towards an inevitable crash. I was going to make an hour-glass reference there too, to round out my team of over-used phrases in that sentence, but the prevalence of sand in the desert terrain struck me as being a little bit of low-hanging fruit, and I do have standards (really?) for things.

Yes, all of the implied meanings, subtext, and profound commentaries was subsumed into those five little words that are causing such a storm; a storm on all of the wrong points, but I accept the compliment all the same.

[oberliner]

45. Did you mean compliment?

If not, then I may have missed a very clever joke.

I agree with you that it isn't a big deal to have used that phrase.

I would also note that Googling "top dog IN the kennel" rather than "top dog OF the kennel" produces many more hits - some of which having nothing to do with actual dogs.

I just couldn't resist adding my two cents.

[Alamuti Lotus]

46. I did

Correction made, thank you. That seems confusing when the other word is used.

Not entirely sure why I used your particular posting as a reply to all of the other nonsense that was in response to the origiral, but it may be considered a reply to most of the others as well.

[oberliner]

47. I'm glad you did

It was a fun read!

[Swede]

35. What kennel are you from, azurnoir?

And who is your top dog?

[azurnoir]

42. actually I'm a cat and we keep that a secret

but as a hint its usually really the female

[Alamuti Lotus]

41. my backhanded high praise of Netanyahoo was, indeed, ignored entirely

Personally, I thought that was the more shocking and offensive statement than anything else I'd written above, but I suppose there's no accounting for lack of taste.

I truly never cease to be amazed at the energized paranoia routinely on display:--a deranged and compulsive demand to be persecuted, even when no such persecution remotely existed in the first place aside from the fictionalized assumptions of the self-styled victim. Well, enough of this hysteric nonsense and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, does it not? The fact that this dance is so well performed in packs, akin to thoroughly rehearsed formation flying, just compounds my astounded amusement at this erstwhile grotesque spectacle.

[Swede]

44. What a pretentious steaming pile.

Nothing worse than pretending to be educated by clumsily using big words.

[Alamuti Lotus]

48. still ignored entirely..

but for your benefit, I do promise to use smaller words in the future.

[Swede]

49. Hopefully,you'll understand what they mean.

There are dictionaries online,if you don't.

[Scootaloo]

28. Looking to start an engineering dispute, Swede?

[Swede]

29. No,just wondering why when referring to Israel,dogs and kennels is applied.

Try that with Gaza or the West Bank some time.

[shira]

30. Try dog/kennels with Gaza or the West Bank....

....and cries of bigotry and racism will soon follow, along with a tombstone.

It's just criticism, however, when it applies to Jews.

[Scootaloo]

31. No, you're trying to start shit where there is none to start with

If you don't understand English idioms like "top dog," then say so. Don't try to pick a fight that you KNOW isn't there to pick.

[King_David]

34. Everyone has heard of the idiom 'top dog'

'top dog of that kennel' not so much.

[Scootaloo]

37. It's extending the metaphor

if you really want to wring your hands about how someone views Jews, you might want to wring them at Swede - since Swede is pretty obviously taking a statement about Netanyahu, and applying it to ALL JEWS.

Or maybe you can read back on some of Shira's posts. Take a shot every time Shira calls Jews "Nazis," "judenrat," and otherwise dehumanizes / delegitimatizes Jews who don't share Shira's precise opinions. Try to not suffer liver failure.

[King_David]

38. Liver Failure

I don't get it.

Swede wasn't the one who made that comment and not Shira.

[Swede]

39. Failed zionist experiment,top dog,kennel,see it's all a harmless metaphor.

nt

[shira]

40. Since when has Shira dehumanized Jews, calling them nazis or judenrat? n/t

[oberliner]

5. How about funding Hezbollah and Hamas? Providing them with weapons?

Does that not count for anything?

[Scootaloo]

6. And this just started in 2005?

And I'm sure Hamas and Hezbollah will have Israel destroyed utterly any day now. Aaaaaaany day. yessir. Real soon. Yup. Wiped off the map, you bet. Blink of an eye, certainly. Uh huh.

[oberliner]

7. No it's been over several Presidents and Supreme Leaders

After all, it's really the Supreme Leader who calls the shots, and the two that have ruled Iran since the revolution have been saying this sort of thing for decades.

Thankfully they have been unable to destroy Israel - but it's only been relatively recently that they have been moving towards the nuclear arena which could change the equation somewhat.

That's why a lot of Israelis are getting tense about it.

[Scootaloo]

9. You have a special talent, Oberliner

You can provide white-knuckled panic propaganda... without being in a white-knuckled panic. It's a valuable skill, have you considered being a PR person for an investment bank? I mean you're doing it here for free on Israel's behalf, I'm just saying you could actually make money with it.

It is no more Iran's goal to "destroy Israel" than it is Israel's goal to "destroy Iran." It's rhetoric. Maybe you noticed similar rhetoric between the US and the Soviet Union. "Oh, we will destroy you! We will lay you low! history will see us as the victors!" Yadda yadda yadda. A few bloody wars-by-proxy, but nobody was "destroyed," nor did nukes do much more than enable either side to threaten to nuke back if nuked first.

Your premise - "OHNOES IRAN WILL NUKE ISRAEL!" - is ludicrous and, frankly, fucking unhinged from reality. It depends on the assumption that the leadership of Iran is a bunch of wild-eyed slobbering suicidal stupid people. While I'll grant this is an easy image to sell to an American audience - after all, we thought Blackface was funny as hell up into the 1960's - it's pretty far from reality. The whole thing falls apart if one realizes that the leadership of Iran is perfectly rational, and acting at least in their own self-interests, if not in the interests of their nation as a whole.

I wonder if Israelis are tense at the idea of Iran having nuclear weapons, or if they're tense over their own government trying to find a way to start a war with Iran (and by proxy Syria and Lebanon, possibly even Russia) while at the same time having no US support. Given that mr. Bibbles seems to have little to no popular support for his rhetoric, I guess it's a moot question

[oberliner]

10. Hezbollah says its 'precision rockets' could kill tens of thousands of Israelis

The Iranian-backed Lebanese group Hezbollah said on Friday it could kill tens of thousands of Israelis by striking specific targets in Israel with what it described as precision-guided rockets.

"I tell the Israelis that you have a number of targets, not a large number ... that can be hit with precision rockets ... which we have," Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah said in a broadcast speech.

He said he would not name the targets and did not say whether the rockets were newly acquired weapons.

The threat came as Israel continued to debate whether to attack Iranian nuclear facilities. Such a move could trigger retaliation from Iran's allies, like Hezbollah. Nasrallah said Iran's response to any Israeli attack would be "lightning" and huge.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/hezbollah-says-its-precision-rockets-could-kill-tens-of-thousands-of-israelis-1.459027

[Scootaloo]

12. I'm sure Hezbollah says that.

Does the concept of "talking shit" not exist in the politics of your home planet, Oberliner?

Already read the story, by the way. My response to it is the same now that it was earlier; "How dare they threaten to shoot back!"

[oberliner]

18. Home planet?

I'm not sure that remark was called for.

In reference to your other comment: how would Hezbollah attacking Israel constitute "shooting back" - Hezbollah isn't in Iran, they are in Lebanon.

[Scootaloo]

27. Well, you just don't seem to "get it."

And it's not as if we're talking about difficult concepts here. Maybe you're just being intentionally stubborn, but I try to be an optimist, so I just wonder if maybe you're not a native to our world

In particular, you don't seem to understand the concept of trash-talking. You've responding to my pointing out there is no danger of anyone being "wiped out" here, by giving me a story about Nusralleh talking about how mighty Hezbollah's missiles are. What, as if by saying he can kick everyone's ass, that makes it so? His chest-puffing and finger-waggling proclamations of "tens of thousands of Israelis killed" makes them already dead? Or makes him even close to capable of pulling that stunt off?

Of course not. It's rhetorical brinksmanship. This huffing and puffing between Israel and Iran has been going on for a fucking decade now, and every time someone outside Israel huffs or puffs, here comes Team Israel: America Division, pretending as if rhetoric were fact and millions and millions of people had just been killed.

Iran's not going to shoot first. Israel's not going to shoot first. Nusralleh is just feeling left out.

Now, as for shooting back... Now I know you're being intentionally stubborn. Not only have I explained the relationship between military allies on this very thread, but I've seen you make frequent references to Hezbollah being allied to Iran. In fact, the very post we're talking about from you references this fact.

If Israel fires on Iran, Iran's ally in Lebanon will start shooting at Israel. It amazes me how Team Israel: America Division is absolutely stumped trying to figure this out, but the idea of the US riding in to help if Israel is attacked makes perfect sense to them.

[oberliner]

36. OK

All I did was post some quotes from news articles and suggest that I understand why Israelis feel tense. Everything else is coming from you.

I oppose any military attacks on anyone. I think Hezbollah ought to disarm as a militia. I think Israel should tone down the rhetoric. I think Iran should abandon the pursuit of nuclear weapons (if they haven't done so). I support nuclear non-proliferation and peace between all peoples.

If that makes me dense, so be it.

[King_David]

11. 'having no US support'

Really ?

President Obama: Advancing Israel's Security and Supporting Peace
“Our commitment to the security of Israel is rock solid. And as I've said to the Prime Minister in every single one of our meetings, the United States will always have Israel's back when it comes to Israel's security. This is a bond that is based not only on our mutual security interests and economic interests, but is also based on common values and the incredible people-to-people contacts that we have between our two countries.”

President Barack Obama
March 5, 2012


http://www.whitehouse.gov/advancing-israels-security

[Scootaloo]

13. Do you know what the word "unilateral" means, Dave?

I'm sure you've seen it lots in news articles relevant to Israel's recent posturing, but perhaps it eludes your vocabulary.

it means, basically, to "go it alone." Solo. Without your buddies and allies beside you, regardless of their lack of support.

Now. why would mr. Bibbles and his cabinet be talking about "unilateral strikes" if they had US support for the idea of attacking Iran? They wouldn't be, correct? The position from Washington has been, for two administrations now, that we will not apply our resources to Israel's aid if Israel is the aggressor in any conflict in the region. We will come to Israel's defense if they are attacked, but not if they are retaliated against.

And don't start whimpering about how this is "picking on Israel." It's not. Pretty much every military alliance in the world operates this way, and for good reason; it keeps smaller nations from picking fights that their more powerful allies will have to fight.

Remember, not too long ago, the conflict between Georgia and Russia? See, the US has a similar defense pact with Georgia that we do with Israel (and for that matter, Japan and a few other nations; I think Liberia might be one of them? been a while since I read up). Basically, "If you're attacked, we'll help you out." Well, what did Georgia do? They started shooting at Russians. When Russia decided that it would be a good idea to roll in, park their tanks in Tbilisi, and buy souvenirs, the Georgians expected the US to send in the cavalry. We didn't. Because the Georgians had started the mess they were in, and we weren't about to go to war to pull their asses out of the fire they had set.

So it is with Israel. if Iran decides to shoot first, we're on Israel's side. If Israel decides to shoot first, we're going to sit it out.

International politics; it doesn't often go the way that ideologues want it to go.

[azurnoir]

14. I think you are confusing or conflating

does having Israel's back mean involving the US in another ME war, one that is presumptively aimed at destroying Iran's nuclear program, but experts on both sides say will not destroy but only slow down Iran's nuclear program?

and what would US assistance look like would the US be expected to bomb say Lebanon or Gaza should retaliation against Israel come from those sources, just what does having Israel's back mean how does that actualize itself ?

Is this in the best interest of either country?

where does the role of supporter end and the role of enabler begin?

I suppose it could be asked would Iran having a nuclear bomb be in the interest of either country, reality says we saw the Cold War we heard similar doom saying about and rhetoric from the USSR, but the much touted war between the US and USSR never really seemed to materialize did it?

For Iran to Nuke Israel would be suicide and only those who embrace the Islamiphobic view of Muslim's or their leaders wishing mass suicide on their own people would promote such a view IMO

[no_hypocrisy]

2. Sounds like "I double-dog-dare you to attack me" message to Israel.

[johnd83]

8. I have had a few Iranian friends

The groups that want war in Iran are the same type of groups that want war here. There are always those who want war and will find any excuse. It is easy to scare the rest of the population are rile them up for some religious reason. We have the same forces here in the neocons. The vast majority of Iranians, at least the young urban ones, are actually very western. Somehow we need to give them the ability to get rid of the nutcases.

[Alamuti Lotus]

16. is the "westerness" of a population what one should measure them against?

that orientatlist standard has always seemed deeply patronizing at best.

[oberliner]

25. What standard do you use? nt

[johnd83]

22. So you're against western democrascy and western justice systems?

Ideas like freedom of speech? They have their own language, fashion, movies, etc. I didn't mean culturally, I meant ethically.

[azurnoir]

23. not to speak for Alamuti Lotus but what I drew from his comment was something more along the lines

of -The 'W' word may change but the tune remains the same

[johnd83]

24. There is a huge difference

I don't think we can change people's opinions at gunpoint. Encourage and support, yes. Impose, no. The age of empires is long over.

[spin]

26. I have a bad feeling this will not end well. (n/t)