Axis of Evil - Alive and Well

[nbcrusader]

Iran Leader Calls for Israel's Destruction

Iran's hard-line president called for Israel to be "wiped off the map" and said a new wave of Palestinian attacks will destroy the Jewish state, state-run media reported Wednesday.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also denounced attempts to recognize Israel or normalize relations with it.

"There is no doubt that the new wave (of attacks) in Palestine will wipe off this stigma (Israel) from the face of the Islamic world," Ahmadinejad told students Wednesday during a Tehran conference called "The World without Zionism."

 

[verte76]

Ugh, he's talking some pretty ugly stuff.

 

[deep]

Indeed it is an evil thing to talk about


but what is it to


push a people out of their homeland, not to allow them citizenship, to tear out the cherished olive groves that their families have cared for, for hundreds of years.

to cut off and strangle a population and create situation were violent reprisals serve to support the subjugation of that population.

I condemn all sides for not giving more to reach permanent settlement as bodies pile up.

 

[verte76]

There are too many blasted hotheads on all sides in that area of the world.

 

[STING2]

Indeed it is an evil thing to talk about


but what is it to


push a people out of their homeland, not to allow them citizenship, to tear out the cherished olive groves that their families have cared for, for hundreds of years.

to cut off and strangle a population and create situation were violent reprisals serve to support the subjugation of that population.

I condemn all sides for not giving more to reach permanent settlement as bodies pile up.

It was Israel that accepted the UN partition plan in 1948 which equally divided Israel/Palestine. It was Israel that was brutally attacked by 5 countries the day it declared its Independence in 1948. While Israel has worked for peace while at the same time being attacked multiple times by multiple countries trying to wipe it off the face of the map, several of the Arab countries have used their resources to finance terrorism against Israel which has only made the lives of Palestinians worse. There has been no attempt by Palestinians to start or support a non-violent movement to address their disagreements with Israel. Instead, rock throwing, the bombing of Israely teens in disco's, the murder of civilians in cafe's are what they do which accomplishes nothing except to make the Palestinians move toward an independent state look like an act of barbarism. The attempts to invade and wipe out Israel and all the terrorism since 1948 has only accomplished one thing, to make the life of Palestinians worse and their chances of achieving their own independent state unlikely. None of this would be happening if the Arab countries and Palestinians had accepted the 1948 partition plan.

Israel has every right to exist, and the sooner more Arabs or Muslims and Palestinians recognize this, the sooner the Palestinians and Israely's will be able to come to agreement on an indepependent Palestinian State.

As for President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, this idiot should recognize that his own people over the past 10 years have had a worse standard of living than the people in the Occupied Palestinian Territories according to the UN's Human Development Report. The 2005 Index shows for the first time Iran slightly ahead of the Palestinian Territories in terms of standard of living, #99 for Iran, #102 for the Palestinian Territories. As for his comments about wiping Israel off the face of the map, he must be living on another planet, which was part of Saddam's problem. I really hope this is one of the cases where BS is thrown around to please a particular crowd and is not something to take seriously from a policy standpoint.

 

[A_Wanderer]

Yeah I think that the world can trust the Iranian regime with nuclear weapons, it will make them more responsible, and their deserve them to have parity, and they really have the right to share the technology with the rest of the Islamic world

 

[the iron horse]

It was Israel that accepted the UN partition plan in 1948 which equally divided Israel/Palestine. It was Israel that was brutally attacked by 5 countries the day it declared its Independence in 1948. While Israel has worked for peace while at the same time being attacked multiple times by multiple countries trying to wipe it off the face of the map, several of the Arab countries have used their resources to finance terrorism against Israel which has only made the lives of Palestinians worse. There has been no attempt by Palestinians to start or support a non-violent movement to address their disagreements with Israel. Instead, rock throwing, the bombing of Israely teens in disco's, the murder of civilians in cafe's are what they do which accomplishes nothing except to make the Palestinians move toward an independent state look like an act of barbarism. The attempts to invade and wipe out Israel and all the terrorism since 1948 has only accomplished one thing, to make the life of Palestinians worse and their chances of achieving their own independent state unlikely. None of this would be happening if the Arab countries and Palestinians had accepted the 1948 partition plan.

Israel has every right to exist, and the sooner more Arabs or Muslims and Palestinians recognize this, the sooner the Palestinians and Israely's will be able to come to agreement on an indepependent Palestinian State.

As for President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, this idiot should recognize that his own people over the past 10 years have had a worse standard of living than the people in the Occupied Palestinian Territories according to the UN's Human Development Report. The 2005 Index shows for the first time Iran slightly ahead of the Palestinian Territories in terms of standard of living, #99 for Iran, #102 for the Palestinian Territories. As for his comments about wiping Israel off the face of the map, he must be living on another planet, which was part of Saddam's problem. I really hope this is one of the cases where BS is thrown around to please a particular crowd and is not something to take seriously from a policy standpoint.

Excellent post STING2. It would be very refreshing to hear
some politician speak the truth on this issue.

This conflict is never going to end until the Arabs accept the right of Israel to exist.

One thing interesting I found reading the history of the region is that there has never been a country(a state) called Palestine.

Have you ever wondered why other Arab countries have never simply offered the Palestinians to come live in their countries?

A good quick read on the history:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Arab-Israeli_War


One thing you said where I slightly disagree or I could be misunderstanding:

"As for his comments about wiping Israel off the face of the map, he must be living on another planet, which was part of Saddam's problem. I really hope this is one of the cases where BS is thrown around to please a particular crowd and is not something to take seriously from a policy standpoint."

The guy is like a zippo lighter in a room filled with gasoline. It does not take too many flicks.

nbcrusader titled this thread right.

 

[financeguy]

Unfortunately, a lot of Arab leaders spread anti-Jewish propaganda, so there is nothing unexpected about these comments.

 

[VertigoGal]

^Yeah, seriously. I mean, don't the heads of a lot of Muslim countries just sort of spout anti-Israel comments every so often to distract from the fact that they can't control their own country's rampant unemployment?

 

[anitram]

I'm sick of the middle east holding the rest of the world hostage.

 

[Se7en]

might as well just invade iran too.

 

[hiphop]

nbcrusader titled this thread right.

I disagree. nbcrusader has used old Bush rhetoric to qualify something as evil.

This Iranian president may be an extreme hothead, undiplomatic, corrupt, and a criminal like just about every other politician out there.

However, evil implies a certain religious meaning, and it´s not up to us to decide if persons or governments are holy or evil.

 

[boosterjuice]

Sections of the Arab world will never settle until Israel is completely removed from the region. This has been very obvious since 1948. They have tried to remove Israel by 3 methods:

1. The Classic Wars
a) 1948: War of Independence: Isreal had hardly anything to defend itself with but still ended up winning.
b) 1967: The 6 Day War: This is the war that Israel gained some land (Gaza strip, West bank, Golan Heights, Sineai Peninsula).
c) 1973: Yom Kippor: Israel is attacked on its religious holiday.

2. Intifada
Launching full-scale attacks on Israel wasn't working. With 3 failed war attempts, the surrounding Arab countries set up terrorist organizations to carry out attacks on Israel. This is still going on today through suicide bombings. The basic strategy here is slowly break Israel into submission. Israeli's are living in fear all of time. That's hard on the mentality.

3. Media
Palestinians are definitely winning wars now in the media. They have done a great job swaying public opinion and painting Israel as a overpowering arm of USA and an occupying force. And as stupid as this sounds, many media agencies justify Arab terrorist attacks and label them as freedom fighters.

The sad news for Israel is that, although it may have won the first wave of attacks, it is losing the battle of the Intifada and Media. Israel is now in a state of surrendering lands that I would never have dreamed of just decades ago.

West Bank: Gone

Gaza: That will go next.

East Jerusalem: Watch out for this one. Both parties really want Jerusalem. This is really the heart of the all trouble. Certain Arab organizations will never accept that one of their Holy sites is controlled by a non-muslim country.

 

[hiphop]

Sections of the Arab world will never settle until Israel is completely removed from the region. This has been very obvious since 1948. They have tried to remove Israel by 3 methods:

1. The Classic Wars
a) 1948: War of Independence: Isreal had hardly anything to defend itself with but still ended up winning.
b) 1967: The 6 Day War: This is the war that Israel gained some land (Gaza strip, West bank, Golan Heights, Sineai Peninsula).
c) 1973: Yom Kippor: Israel is attacked on its religious holiday.

Not very exact. b) wasn´t the Arab world trying to remove Israel, but an attack started by Israelis. Later, they called it pre-emptive, but the US was against it at that time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War

 

[A_Wanderer]

You are wrong the Arabs began the Six Day War by illegal closing the Gulf of Aqaba to Israeli shipping and pushing the removal of U.N. troops from the Siani peninsula, this was an act of war and Israel was justified under international law to take action. The Arab armies were poised to strike against Israel and were prepared to "drive the Jews into the sea".

 

[hiphop]

You are wrong the Arabs began the Six Day War by illegal closing the Gulf of Aqaba to Israeli shipping and pushing the removal of U.N. troops from the Siani peninsula, this was an act of war and Israel was justified under international law to take action. The Arab armies were poised to strike against Israel and were prepared to "drive the Jews into the sea".

Then why is this war called 6 day war?

If your assumption is right, the war would have started on 23rd of May, not on the 5th of June 1967, and would be called 3-week-war.

As to explain the situation - from wikipedia: On 23 May, Egypt closed the Straits of Tiran to all shipments bound for Israel, thus blockading the Israeli port of Eilat at the northern end of the Gulf of Aqaba. Also, Nasser stated, "Under no circumstances can we permit the Israeli flag to pass through the Gulf of Aqaba." While most of Israel's commerce used Mediterranean ports, and, according to John Quigley, no Israeli-flag vessel had used the port of Eilat for the two years preceding June 1967, oil carried on non-Israeli flag vessels to Eilat was a very significant import. There were ambiguities, however, about how rigorous the blockade would be, particularly whether it would apply to non-Israeli flag vessels. Citing international law Israel considered the closure of the straits to be illegal, and it had stated it would consider such a blockade a casus belli in 1957 when it withdrew from the Sinai and Gaza. The Arab states disputed Israel's right of passage through the Straits, noting that they had not signed the Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone specifically because of article 16(4) which provided Israel with that right. In the UN General Assembly debates immediately after the war, many nations argued that even if international law gave Israel the right of passage, Israel was not entitled to attack Egypt to assert it because the closure was not an "armed attack" as defined by article 51 of the UN Charter.

 

[Ft. Worth Frog]

Of course, Israel just had to ignore those armies the Arab nations were building up, right?

 

[A_Wanderer]

Then why is this war called 6 day war?

Because there was six days of hot conflict in which Israel was able to fend of the combined attack from the Arabs on three different fronts, the IAF pre-emptively stuck at the Arab air forces and it was able to fend off the ensuing Arab armies movements, in the process it had to sieze defensive positions that were not part of the partioning of mandate Palestine at the creation of the state of Israel.

Make no mistake about it, the Arabs had every intention of preemption was as cited the wiping Israel of the face of the planet. This attitude continues to this day with the declarations by the terror groups about "driving the Jews into the sea" and the stated goal of liberating Palestine into Arab control ~ the definition of Palestine stretches all the way to the Mediteranian encompassing the entirety of the state of Israel.

For a detailed breakdown of the 6 day war checkout http://www.israeli-weapons.com/history/six_day_war/SixDayWar.html

 

[babyman]

It was Israel that accepted the UN partition plan in 1948 which equally divided Israel/Palestine. It was Israel that was brutally attacked by 5 countries the day it declared its Independence in 1948. While Israel has worked for peace while at the same time being attacked multiple times by multiple countries trying to wipe it off the face of the map, several of the Arab countries have used their resources to finance terrorism against Israel which has only made the lives of Palestinians worse. There has been no attempt by Palestinians to start or support a non-violent movement to address their disagreements with Israel. Instead, rock throwing, the bombing of Israely teens in disco's, the murder of civilians in cafe's are what they do which accomplishes nothing except to make the Palestinians move toward an independent state look like an act of barbarism. The attempts to invade and wipe out Israel and all the terrorism since 1948 has only accomplished one thing, to make the life of Palestinians worse and their chances of achieving their own independent state unlikely. None of this would be happening if the Arab countries and Palestinians had accepted the 1948 partition plan.

Israel has every right to exist, and the sooner more Arabs or Muslims and Palestinians recognize this, the sooner the Palestinians and Israely's will be able to come to agreement on an indepependent Palestinian State.

As for President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, this idiot should recognize that his own people over the past 10 years have had a worse standard of living than the people in the Occupied Palestinian Territories according to the UN's Human Development Report. The 2005 Index shows for the first time Iran slightly ahead of the Palestinian Territories in terms of standard of living, #99 for Iran, #102 for the Palestinian Territories. As for his comments about wiping Israel off the face of the map, he must be living on another planet, which was part of Saddam's problem. I really hope this is one of the cases where BS is thrown around to please a particular crowd and is not something to take seriously from a policy standpoint.

I would not find other right words, agree

 

[nathan1977]

So much for Iran being the "progressive" one in the Middle East...

 

[Irvine511]

So much for Iran being the "progressive" one in the Middle East...

not their president, certainly.

however, the population at large is quite educated ... there's much, much more to Iran than meets the eye.

 

[A_Wanderer]

not their president, certainly.

however, the population at large is quite educated ... there's much, much more to Iran than meets the eye.

I agree entirely, the Iranian people and their culture is quite wonderful.

Do people know that the fourth highest language for blogs is Farsi?

 

[verte76]

I agree entirely, the Iranian people and their culture is quite wonderful.

Do people know that the fourth highest language for blogs is Farsi?

One of my favorite local restaurants is Persian.

 

[Irvine511]

while i think the Iraq War is easily the biggest mistake the US has made since Vietnam, and while i think there are many situations where the actions of the IDF have been grossly disproportionate, and while i can't at all defend the idea of "settlements," the Iranian presidents comments do underscore, again, for me, the fact that there is such a thing as Islamo-fascist and that there does exist a grossly simplified black-and-white view of the world as divided into believers and non-believers and that non-believers must be killed.

there are bad people out there, and they must be stopped.

but "shock and awe" isn't the best way to do this.

 

[nbcrusader]

there are bad people out there, and they must be stopped.

Would this fit in the "Is War Ever Justified?" thread?

 

[nbcrusader]

Iranian leader refutes critics over Israel remarks

CNN) -- Thousands of Iranians staged anti-Israel protests across the country Friday and repeated calls by their ultraconservative president demanding the Jewish state's destruction.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad -- marching with the protesters -- signaled he stood by his remarks, even as Iranian officials tried to defuse the issue.

 

[Irvine511]

Would this fit in the "Is War Ever Justified?" thread?

why are you making the rather huge leap that the only way to stop bad people is by going to war with them?

i do think that a war can be justified (iraq is certainly not, imho), however i also think that war is always the worst solution to a problem.

i also think that intellecutal justifications for war are best made by comfortable Westerners who don't have to live with things like collateral damage.

i would imagine that most of the people on this board who are pro-war would feel much differently if they were a shopkeeper in Fallujah or Tikrit or a taxi driver in Baghdad.

 

[STING2]

why are you making the rather huge leap that the only way to stop bad people is by going to war with them?

i do think that a war can be justified (iraq is certainly not, imho), however i also think that war is always the worst solution to a problem.

i also think that intellecutal justifications for war are best made by comfortable Westerners who don't have to live with things like collateral damage.

i would imagine that most of the people on this board who are pro-war would feel much differently if they were a shopkeeper in Fallujah or Tikrit or a taxi driver in Baghdad.

I would imagine most anti-war people on this board would feel differently about the coalitions removal of Saddam if they actually had to live under Saddam. The majority of Iraqi's support the process and want coalition troops to remain to help insure the development of a strong, stable Iraqi govenment.

 

[Dreadsox]

I would imagine most anti-war people on this board would feel differently about the coalitions removal of Saddam if they actually had to live under Saddam. The majority of Iraqi's support the process and want coalition troops to remain to help insure the development of a strong, stable Iraqi govenment.

How do the dead ones feel about it?

I did not enlist in the Unitedd States Armed forces to bring freedom around the world.

That was not in my oath.

Even the most ardent ANTI-WAR poster on this board recognized the EVIL of Saddam.

There is only ONE reason sending troops into Iraq is acceptable, and that is there was an immediate threat to the US from Iraq.

 

[Irvine511]

I would imagine most anti-war people on this board would feel differently about the coalitions removal of Saddam if they actually had to live under Saddam. The majority of Iraqi's support the process and want coalition troops to remain to help insure the development of a strong, stable Iraqi govenment.

again, it's less the removal of saddam that is the issue, but how saddam was removed, and then the shocking lack of any sort of postwar plan that has turned iraq into the most dangerous place on earth.

you've got a very blinkered view of the situation, but it serves your narrow ideology well.

and, please spare us all by not ruining this thread with your tiresome postings about UN resolutions.