Iranian President Wants West to Apologize

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday said the West should apologize to Iran for accusing it of trying to develop a nuclear weapons program and said his country would continue to resist international pressure to halt its nuclear energy program.

Ahmadinejad stressed that Iran would not give up its nuclear rights.

Ahmadinejad reiterated that Iran should be compensated for a two and a half year suspension of its nuclear activities. Under heavy pressure from the West, Iran suspended its enrichment of uranium and related activities in 2003 and began negotiating with Germany, Britain and France to reach an agreed framework for its nuclear development. It resumed nuclear research earlier this year when talks failed.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/20/AR2006032001428.html

he's a guy who is just as good at 'catapulting the propaganda' as bush is, probably even better. crazy as a fox.

He declared Israel needs wiped off the map. After that statement he deserves to be shunned and disarmed only.

Israel can take care of itself, if any country is foolish enough to try to wipe it off the map.

Bushco have wiped tens of thousands off the face of the earth.

would you go about disarming him? If you want invasion, that is insane and ludicrous and base. If you want any military action, that is equally insane and disgusting.

(on edit) This Iranian leader is clearly insane, but that does nothing to justify any sort of wrong action.

I would like to remind you that Israel's actions have wiped Palestine off the map.

Are there any archives or museum of past printed or coin money from this
Palestine you speak of? I can't find Palestine on any maps either. Where
exactly is the correct history of this missing country?

Palestine, the land that was part of the British Mandate. It was supposed to be partitioned off, with the Zionists with most of the land (and less of the people, coincidentally) and the Arabs with the rest. Well, that was before Israel took over the Arabs' land and ethnically cleansed 750,000 people off of it for their own base aims. Israel has continued to steal land, always killing as they carry out the theft.

Which is the other "missing" part of Palestine. Not exactly an open-door policy the Jordanians have to their Arab brothers, is it?

I seem to recall something about the Jews in "Palestine" three thousand years ago, btw.

Bottom line: both parties have a claim, Jews and Palestinians. No real solution will ever satisfy both completely. Absolutists on either side accomplish nothing except prolonging the trouble.

Peace.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

http://www.drberlin.com/palestine/

The short discussion of history of the place is good too.

He apologises for all the stupid, obnoxious, vile things he's said over the past year, then we'll apologise for the nuke thing.

Let's put Ahmadinejad and Bush** on a deserted island together and see who prevails. The winner gets flown to Baghdad where the Iraqis will lay flowers and candy at his feet.

:evilgrin:

except, we could throw in all other religious freaks as well (all the Iranian mullahs, radical clerics, Pat Robertson types).

Then the world could use the island as a nice isolated place to dispose of all nukes, by actively using them...

apologizing to the Iranian people for destroying their democracy in 1953 and installing the horrible Shah who inflicted a reign of terror on them for 25 years? That's HOW they were thrown into the arms of the mullahs! WE DID IT!

That would be a good place to start peace talks, it seems to me.

--------------

And for those of you who keep trotting out this VERBAL threat to Israel, every time this guy comes up, what about BUSH's MORE THAN VERBAL threat to Iraq? What about invading a country and slaughtering tens of thousands of innocent people, and maiming tens of thousands more, and dumping loads of depleted uranium on them, and destroying civil order? You want to rail against someone, rail against BUSH! Iran hasn't done ANYTHING TO ANYBODY!

As for nukes, why can India have nukes, and not Iran? Tell me that. Iran is a sovereign nation which has the entire US military now on its border, and the president of the US, who likes torture and slaughter, saber-rattling against it, and both the US and Israel undoubtedly have nukes aimed right at its heart. The Iranians have no reason to trust us--we destroyed their democracy, and, although we may have forgotten about it in our stupid myopic way, THEY haven't.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

You do remember that Bush made threats against Iraq before attacking, correct? So, does Israel have to suffer the same fate as Iraq? Granted, Iran doesn't have the power it needs now, but with nukes...then it would be a whole different ball of wax. Face it, the sanctity and sovereignty of Israel is of little interest to anyone other than Israelis, many Jews, and those that like using her as a "scapegoat."

If another country were to invade and attack Israel, like we have done to Iraq, there would be very few here, IMO, that would give a flip.

It serves Iran's purpose to try and make the US and Israel look like the bad guys. Iran will not throw away that card. Iran will only attack Israel with rhetoric, or unless provoked. However, Iran would probably use its oil as the main means to avenge any attack on it.

With that said, Iran's president and his over the top and inflamed rhetoric doesn't do well to reflect a purpose, except as a way of warning the US and Israel that Iran is not deterred from what it perceives as threats to its national interests and sovereignty.

The US has a historical record of physically using its military and economic prowess to maintain its grip on the global community. Both Israel and the US have used inflamed rhetoric against Iran for years. I would have to admit that the US is the biggest hypocrite in this case.

It's absurd that Israel and the US would insist on nations not to develop militarily or through technology, because they don't deem it in their best interests, while at the same time not having a problem with ignoring past treaties.

Hasn't the lessons of the past taught us anything. We're not going to physically force these nations to bend to our will. It just ain't gonna happen. You only further inflame and piss people off, and they will push back with any means they deem necessary for their survival.

I suggest reading All the Shah's Men, whose subtitle is "An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror"

and to safety in the Middle East as any other indigenous group. That is not the issue--for me anyway. It seems that any attempt to understand the Middle East from EVERYONE's point of view, not just Israel's, often brings forth defensive statements that the writer/speaker would just as well see the state of Israel extinguished and would not defend it against aggression. Israel is very isolated in that landscape, surrounded by hostile neighbors, and has, as a consequence, turned itself into a medieval fortress bristling with armaments. This is simply an untenable situation--especially with the Bush junta in control of the US military--and could lead to WW III and the end of all life on earth. (Read Carl Sagan's "The Cold and the Dark," which describes the impacts to our atmosphere of even a limited nuclear exchange.) In this volatile situation, the US and Israel are PUSHING Iran to obtain nukes--and doing everything possible to make Iran feel fearful of invasion and bombing, after a long history of horrendous interference in that country, including destruction of Iranian democracy. THIS IS NOT THE WAY TO PEACE, nor to the survival and prosperity of the Jewish homeland.

Some defenders of Israel take the same kind of stance as Bush: "You're either for us or against us." That is not the case with ME--nor of a lot of other people who want peace, prosperity and survival for all Middle Eastern peoples, and for the rest of us as well, and who see the desperate need for WISDOM and for PEACEMAKERS in this situation. There IS no military solution to it! And driving other countries to feel afraid and to pursue military or nuclear defense is NUTS!

My analogy is to a rough neighborhood where crime is rampant. You can put up electrified fences, and get killer dogs, and arm yourself to the teeth, and you might gain yourself some temporary safety within your own conclave, but you are not really safe and secure. The only real safety and security must come from the hard work of community COHESION, taking community responsibility, and seeing to the hopes and dreams and education and prosperity and "upward mobility" of all your neighbors. Friendship, generosity and recognizing and fostering the humanity and equality of your neighbors--and building community--are the keys to peace and prosperity. Militarism not only bankrupts everybody, it leads inevitably to disaster--to unnecessary death and destruction, and to more hatred.

People involved in a conflict--people who are afraid--find this very, very hard to see. I can understand Israel's fear. I can understand Iran's fear. And what I see is the Bush junta, and the war profiteering corporate news monopolies, stoking fear--just as they have done in every other situation, whether here in the US or internationally. Fear is a blinder. Fear is a killer. Fear MUST be overcome, for there to be peace and justice in the Middle East and in the world, and for humanity to survive this era.

My first thought, when I saw the headline, was that he wanted an apology for the overthrow of Mossadegh. Had that not happened, the history of the Middle East might have been very different, and better in the long run.

The West keeps reaping what it sows in the Middle East and keeps ignoring or forgetting the past.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Point #1 This is 2006, not 1953. Sorry about the Shah, but I wasn't alive then and neither were the large majority of Iranians or Americans. What happened in 1953, however nasty, does not allow Ahmadinejad to threaten Armageddon or work to hasten the arrival of the 12th Imam or whatever they call the End of Days. Nuclear threats do not get free passes, period.

Point #2. Just because Bush is a dick all the other dicks in the world suddenly have free reign to threaten war and theocratic thuggery? Please. You weren't on the debate team in high school, were you?

As to why India can have nukes and not Iran...hmmm. That's a very very tough question, because the countries are, you know, basically identical. I think Mugabe and Qaddafi should get some nukes too - and Turkmenistan and the P.L.O. and Belarus and, hell, the Gotti family and Pablo Escobar's nephew and I wouldn't mind one myself, either.

*cough cough*


These are my opinions, nothing more, nothing less, nothing personal.

ON EDIT: this sounds harsher than intended. No offense, PeacePatriot. My point is, there is just no room for error when it comes to nukes. Letting crazy theocrats have nukes - theocrats who think that God has appointed them to preside over the End Times - seems a crapshoot, to put it mildly. Every time another country gets a nuke, the probability that one is going to be used somewhere someday goes up. I don't know what the answer to the Iranian problem is, but I do know that ignoring it will not solve it.

Each and every one of them. Individually. :grr:

He can STFU.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.