U.S. and Europe Gird for Hard Line From Iran's New President

[drdon326]

The tone of the next administration was reflected in a recent law passed by a parliamentary faction aligned with Ahmadinejad -- and in defiance of a temporary deal brokered last November suspending Iran's uranium enrichment. Parliament ordered the government to resume the enrichment, a step in energy production that can be converted for use in a weapons program.

Ahmadinejad has also criticized Iranian negotiators for being weak with the West. "Nuclear energy is a result of Iranian people's scientific development," he said on Election Day. "This right of the Iranian people will soon be recognized by those who have so far denied it."

Apprehension about the future was apparent yesterday in statements from Britain and Germany. "I hope that under Mr. Ahmadinejad's presidency, Iran will take early steps to address international concerns about its nuclear program and policies towards terrorism, human rights and the Middle East peace process," British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said.German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer said the Europeans expect Iran to honor the terms of the temporary deal to halt uranium enrichment.

-

The Ahmadinejad landslide is "an earthquake" for Iran's foreign policy, said Hadi Semati, a Tehran University political scientist who is now a fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. "The impact of this election will be felt more outside Iran than inside. Based on his statements during the campaign, he's going to be a very tough partner for negotiations." The new president also reflects the hard-line positions in Tehran on two issues at the center of U.S. foreign policy: Iraq and Israel, Iranian sources and U.S. analysts said.

He appears to have a "much more serious ideological and moral opposition to Israel" than his predecessors, wrote Anthony H. Cordesman, an expert on the Persian Gulf region, in an analysis yesterday for the Center for Strategic and International Studies. There is a "higher risk" of Iranian action in Iraq -- and, thus, of confrontation with the United States, he said.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/25/AR2005062501009.html

.................................................................

What a great guy.

[drdon326]

1. Pop quiz

Who is more worried over a nuclear attack due to Iran's nuclear program??

a.Israel
b.Washington
c.France
d.UK
E.GERMANY
F.ALL OF THE ABOVE ARE NOW ON VALIUM and ARE RECEIVING ELECTRO-SHOCK THERAPY.


(CUE IN JEOPARDY THEME SONG)

[Frederik]

16. None of the above

Because the probability is still infinitesimal.

[Zhade]

23. Alex Trebek is cursing you right now.

"How dare he know the right answer!"

;)

[Frederik]

30. It's the electro-shock therapy

:hi:

[Zhade]

36. Shocking!

Okay, that pun deserves a smack.

:hi: to you, too!

[salin]

2. another example of blowback from bush policies per Iraq

they just keep making the world safer and safer.

(The allusion is to the sudden appeal of hardliners anti us rhetoric - in a time when we have invaded one neighbor and are using harsh rhetoric that sounds reminiscent to the pre Iraq war rhetoric.)

[Karenina]

3. Rummy, is dat you?

Oder bist Du nur Charge d'affaire of demonization?

[drdon326]

4. Non....

je suis charge d'affaire of "The truth will set you free".

C'est dommage pour vous.

merci beaucoups.

[Frederik]

17. Votre "vérité", monsieur

ne nous liberera jamais.

[Zhade]

25. OUCH!

It's been a decade since high school French, but I got the gist of that.

And I agree.

[Monkie]

5. might it be that the Iranian people ELECTED him to take a hard line

nice article,tries so desperately to give the impression of joint US&EU concern while only quoting the war criminal jack straw and a couple of think tanks which I'm sure have no agenda of their own to push here,going by the article im not even going to bother googling them.
I think if i was a Iranian i would be voting for a strong leader to stand up to the outside aggressors threatening its interests, remember the Iranians have 130,000 strong hostile army ravaging its neighbour as we speak

[drdon326]

6. So let me get this straight.......

you would consider voting for a Fundamnentalist conservative-reactionary who wants lead his country according a religious philosophy ??

Did you vote for shrub also ?? Come clean.(eosarcasm)

[Vladimir]

7. Well who would you have voted for?

Rafsanjani, the man who you quoted speaking so eloquently in the former thread?

[drdon326]

8. LOL....I ASKED YOU FIRST.

they both suck imo.

Since monkie didnt answer....Would you consider voting for a Fundamnentalist conservative-reactionary who wants lead his country according a religious philosophy ??

[Vladimir]

9. Yeah, you see what a pain this question is?

I'm a communist Don, neither of these two bear much love towards my kind. But if you wouldn't consider voting for Mr. Ahmadinejad, as I gather from the tone of your post, would you have abstained? Or voted Rafsanjani?

[drdon326]

10. Oh shit....They would REALLY hate you.......

ALMOST as much as they would hate me......even though the iranians and I both dont eat pork.

As for what i would do......easy....get the hell outta there !!!!

[Vladimir]

13. Well that is the easy answer, though

I can't really blame you for it. I think the position of the exiled communist groups (whose judgement I am strongly tempted to respect in this matter) is to boycott the elections and call for protests against them, and if I was an Iranian then maybe I'd have the guts to do that, and maybe I wouldn't.

[drdon326]

45. And doesnt it bother you......

that they have exiled communist groups??....by people who are POLICICALLY the exact opposite of what you are.

[Vladimir]

46. Sure,

but you know Don, I have a slightly different prespective on this, cos I was in Belgrade in 99 for NATO's "humanitarian" intervention. And bear in mind that what I went through was nothing compared to what these people will go through... but I can't support interventionism, and I won't get het under the collar about Iran and allow my feeling (and here I really mean the collective feeling within our countries) to be used as part of a justification for another bit of imperialism. And there is a broader point here too, because I don't accept that one can impose democracy or freedom - the people of Iran, the working class of Iran, deserve to find their own solutions to their problems. Our countries had the luxury of centuries in which to slowly humanise our conduct towards homo sapiens, but we expect the rest of the world to hop skip and jump to our newly fashionable tune whenever it suits us. And I just can't deal with that.

[Karenina]

14. Could one ask the same of those

four-square behind the *dauphin? :shrug:

I find your posts SO AGGRESSIVE against any shade of grey, tinged with a coded threat toward anyone suggesting a more diplomatic, "wait and see" approach. What's the deal??? :shrug:

[drdon326]

19. Wha ???

Aggressive ?....not really......I will grant you opinionated.

They tried the the "wait and see " approach in the 1930's and the world was one step away from domination.

[Zhade]

26. Are you seriously suggesting Iran is now like Nazi Germany?

I mean, anti-Semitism exists there, no question, but you're deranged if you think Iran poses the same threat - even to Israel - that Nazi Germany did.

After all, the Jewish people didn't have a homeland rife with nuclear weapons with which to keep their would-be killers largely at bay back then.

[drdon326]

28. No....but I am suggesting...

ignoring a threat in this age of nuclear weapons by assuming a country that vows "Death to America", "Death to Israel" and a runner up who advocates using nukes to commit possible genocide, should not be ignored and assumed that 'they really dont mean it'.

I.BELIEVE.THEM.

[Zhade]

34. Well, I simpy don't believe them.

I don't see the threat materializing, and I CERTAINLY don't advocate the use of illegal preventative attacks on the off chance that the Iranian government MIGHT think about using nukes some day.

If I fell for that paranoid delusion (that Iran is willing to sacrifice its very existence to get rid of Israel), I'd have been scared enough to have advocated nuking the USSR back during the Cold War. Needless to say, had I been politically aware at the time, I wouldn't have, because MAD worked...just like it would work if Iran got nukes.

The bottom line is that you believe something I don't see a shred of credible evidence for. Yes, Iranian hardliners talk tough to accrue money and power. Duh. Likud hardliners do the same thing. So do Republicans, and hardliners and rightwingers the world over.

I just don't share what I see as your paranoia. That's not intended as an insult - I just think you see things happening that really aren't going to happen.

[drdon326]

37. Intelligent , well-written, thoughtful post....

I guess we just disagree.

[Zhade]

38. I guess so. It seems to be a chasm we cannot bridge.

But if I could just get you to repudiate the Jerusalem Post... ;)

[drdon326]

39. LOL....I'll work on that.

eom

[Zhade]

40. You know, we don't agree on a lot...

...but you're not all bad. :)

[drdon326]

41. LOL

i know some people who would give you an argument about that.

Besides....its Sunday.....wait till tomorrow.

[Zhade]

42. It does give me hope when people like us can calmly debate.

It's a good thing.

[drdon326]

43. I agree

youre OK too......HAVE A GOOD NIGHT.

[Karenina]

44. Same as now

only the U.S. gub'mint is the culprit. Iran hasn't the motive or means for world domination, Your *MIC DOES and is committing GENOCIDE in Iraq.

[Monkie]

11. i respect others rights to religious freedom i might even vote for

a sincere conservative reactionary who wants to lead my country according to a religious philosophy if he respects my freedoms and was the right man for the job.my personal knowledge of islam doesnt lead me to think i couldnt vote for or not live in a country lead by a person of islamic faith.The history of christian nations certainly doesnt give me any faith in any of the religions im "supposed" to believe in as a white anglo-saxon ,or leaders that wrap themselves with the christian "flag", i didnt vote for bush nor would i ever.

[drdon326]

12. (((( THUD )))))

I am almost speechless.

[Monkie]

15. :D

maybe you can answer me a question,
could you vote for a person whos faith was islam,would you support a democratically elected islamic leader?

[drdon326]

22. If he believed in Democracy....

and would LEAD BY non-religious democracy,with equal rights for men ,women and all religions,yes.

[Frederik]

18. I would rather vote for Ahmedinejad than for Rafsanjani

[salin]

21. why?

[Frederik]

29. For one, he's not a cleric

in fact, he's the first non-clerical president of the Islamic republic. And he has promised to do something about the increasing economic differences in Iran, increase unemployment benefits and salaries of public servants and so on. He's also an economic nationalist. Not a Hugo Chavez, but better than Rafsanjani.

[Zhade]

20. I agree with Juan Cole: not a great guy, a lot like b*s*.

Of course, that still does not justify illegal preventative attacks on Iran's nuclear facilities.

[drdon326]

24. Zhade.......set me straight....

I had this discussion with Jack Rabbit and i simply dont remember the answer....

What is the difference between a preventitive attack and a pre-emptive attack ?

[Zhade]

27. WE had this discussion as well, and I clarified it for you then.

Simple version: preemptive means "we're about to be attacked", preventative means "we might, someday, get attacked, by someone who may not like us".

Preemptive, if truly preemptive, is legal under international law. Preventative is not. The b*s* administration conflated and continues to conflate the two intentionally, to confuse Americans into thinking that the PREVENTATIVE strike at Iraq was a PREEMPTIVE one - which it most assuredly was not, and was known not to be when we went to war.

[salin]

31. That is helpful, thank you.

[Zhade]

32. You're very welcome. Always happy to help clear things up.

NT!

[drdon326]

33. We did have this discusson and my apolgies for forgetting.

THANK YOU
THANK YOU
THANK YOU

I now have it memorized....atleast for the next 10 minutes.

[Zhade]

35. It's okay, we all forget.

I do hope you bookmark the thread or something, so you can think about the difference in the future. It's a significant difference that has been purposely twisted and distorted by the fascists in charge, and even I have caught myself using the wrong term before (hence, my passionate desire to underline the difference).