Menace in the Mideast

[barb162]

THE FRIGHTENING PROSPECT of a nuclear-armed Iran became even more terrifying last week with President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's declaration that Israel "must be wiped off the map."


snip
Ahmadinejad was elected this summer after the Islamic clerics who wield the real power decided who could run and who could not. Their heavy tilt toward extreme conservatives like Ahmadinejad, the former Tehran mayor, reversed the slight openings to the West that were a part of the regime of his predecessor, Mohammad Khatami.

The policy of exterminating Israel has been a hallmark of Iran since radical Islamists seized power in 1979. The government funds terrorist organizations and the families of suicide bombers who murder Israeli civilians. Iran's government news agency — which is not about to misquote the country's president — reported that Ahmadinejad said the establishment of Israel was a blow to the Islamic world and that attacks by Palestinians would destroy the country. He also said Israel's withdrawal of its citizens and troops from Gaza was a trick.

snip
Iran already threatens the peace and stability of the Middle East, with its influence over Shiites in Iraq and funding of anti-Israel terrorists. If it obtained nuclear weapons, it would become a far greater threat and could lead nations such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt to seek their own nukes. The IAEA last month condemned Iran's nuclear activities and required that Tehran be reported to the U.N. Security Council, but the agency did not say when the referral should occur. Ahmadinejad's comments should advance the timetable and make countries more willing to impose sanctions on Iran.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-iran30oct30,0,3295501.story?coll=la-news-comment-editorials

[StClone]

1. Why is Iran sounding crazy?

Well after seeing Iraq invaded for no reason and Syria on the hit parade what choice do they have but sound as crazy as N. Korea to deflect BushCo. Which may be a dangerous game of chicken as W is in a political corner and could act in a distractive and irrational way.

[barb162]

3. Iraq

Democracy was supposed to spread across the Mideast, remember that one? Or was it WMD. Or was it we were supposed to get rid of a brutal dictator. I forget.

The N. Korea guy has been nuts for a while I think.

Further there is nothing to worry about in regard to N. Korea unless you are in a blue state.("Last week North Korea publicly admitted for the first time it has nuclear weapons. The Bush administration has so far shown very little concern, as the North Korean missiles are believed only capable of reaching the Blue States." --Jon Stewart on North Korea's nuclear weapons program)

[newyorican]

2. West faulted for condemning Iran.

It was certainly undiplomatic of Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to
call for Israel to be "wiped off the map" at a conference on Zionism in
Tehran. But the wave of Western fury, with countries such as Canada, France,
the UK and Spain hauling in the Iranian ambassador and protesting, looks
contrived.

Is this the same France that four years ago ignored the comments of its then
ambassador in London, Daniel Bernard, who called Israel "that shitty little
country"? Is this the same UK that likewise turned a deaf ear? Nor is it the
first time an Iranian leader has used such language.

Four years ago, former President Hashemi Rafsanjani, regarded by the West as a moderate, called for
the nuclear annihilation of Israel. The West did not blink an eye. Ever
since the 1979 revolution, Iran has been consistently and vehemently
anti-Israel. The rest of the world has known it and lived with it. It lived
with the knowledge because it also knew that Iran was not in a position to
wipe Israel off the map and that the words were mere rhetoric from those who
wanted to give their people something other than their failures to think
about.

The rest of the world too has been happy to live with the knowledge
that most Muslims and Arabs would prefer that Israel did not exist. But it does exist. It is a question of accepting reality.
So why the apparent anger at something known? And why is it that only the
West is making a fuss?

This response has far more to do with Western fears about Iran's nuclear
intentions than with its views about Israel. Washington, which does not have
diplomatic relations with Tehran and so could not haul in the ambassador to
protest, let the cat out of the bag when it said that the comment showed it
was right to be concerned about Iran's nuclear program.
Yet that is a worrying leap of logic. It suggests that the US and the West
imagine that a nuclear Iran would bomb Israel. If they do, it is
frightening, given what happened with Iraq and the myth of weapons of mass
destruction there. Without a breakthrough on the Iran nuclear issue, it
makes an attack on its nuclear facilities a strong likelihood. Is the ground
being prepared for Israelis doing it, acting on Washington's behalf - a
carbon copy of what happened in 1981 when Israel destroyed the Osirak
nuclear plant near Baghdad? That cannot be ruled out. Last February
President Bush said that the US would back an Israeli attack on Iran if the
latter tried to make nuclear bombs and the former felt threatened. And now
we have President Ahmadinejad being as provocative as he can, using words
that are loaded: To wipe a country off the map involves something fairly
spectacular.

This, of course, is Ahmadinejad the radical speaking, Ahmadinejad the
politician who perhaps wants to divert attention from his government's
failure so far to deliver on his promises to Iran's poor. That is where he
needs to concentrate his energies and his passion. The danger is that with
such rhetoric he gives his nation's enemies the chance to act.

Source

[pelsar]

4. and if they mean it?

seems to me there was similar "retoric" in 48 and 67.....unless of course it was just "posturing".

and irans nprogram nor retoric didnt just start a few years ago...its goes way back....and they been attackin israel via hizballa....

maybe they want to join in?....anybody know how a fanatic islamic iranian mindset work?

cause it sure doesnt follow western diplomatic rules....

[newyorican]

5. doesnt follow western diplomatic rules

Same could be said for fanatic Israeli Jewish and fanatic American Christian mindsets...though it's not limited to Israel, America or Iran for that matter.

The expected response might be that the fanatics are in charge in Iran, but not Israel and the US. That point is debatable.