It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by TheBandit795
Originally posted by FlyersFanyes Iran is a threat to the US. It's also a threat to many other nations. The leader of that country has said many times what his intent is and he has said this publically and LOUDLY. Wipe certain countries off the planet and attack others. That's his motto.
MEMRI, anyone?? I hear Rich23 mentioning that organisation almost every day. Did the Iranian president actually say those words, or was it an invention by MEMRI???
When the US invaded the island of Okinawa, Japanese civilians made suicide attacks on US forces.
It was estimated that the invasion of Japan would cost the Allies 1 million casualties and the Japanese at least 5 million. The atomic bombs proved to the Emperor of Japan that his people had lost the war. When he called for them to surrender he prevented those 5 million Japanese casualties.
An inciendiary attack on Tokyo created a firestorm that killed almost as many people as Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.
At the time of their surrender the Japanese were still in control of Manchuria and it's Chinese population. At the time of their surrender Japan was preparing to launch balloons carrying bacterialogical weapons at the US mainland. There were plans in progress to launch a plane from a submarine to contaminate the water supplies of several West Coast cities.
Immediately after 9-11 not too many US citizens would have complained if we had nuked someone.
Ok so I'll address your Pearl Harbor comments.
From what you posted I guess that any country except for the US has the right to attack any place that the US leaves undefended. I don't care if Roosevelt sent an engraved invitation to Japan inviting them to attack Pearl Harbor. They still chose to attack it and almost every place else in the Pacific. Face the facts. Japan saw that Europe was busy with the Germans and didn't have the resources to defend their interests in the East. Their attack was just a greedy land grab to expand their empire, nothing more. The US Navy was the only thing that could have possibly stood in their way, so they attacked Pearl Harbor to remove that threat.
Let Iran have it's nukes. If they mean what they say there won't be a problem. I'm betting that they don't. When they pop one off let them get what's coming to them. If I was Europe right now I'd reconsider my views. Their current missiles can reach Europe, they can't reach the US.
Originally posted by rich23
I have to say that the response to this thread is, in general, living down to my expectations.
Originally posted by Astygia
So you postulate that the Iranian president is really a peaceful man,
and all the bad things he says are lies developed by MEMRI?
Do you really think Mehr, Iranian Voice, or al-Jazeera send their coverage to MEMRI before it's transmitted to our networks?
Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
It seems like it is an uphill battle just to clarify That Iran didn't really threaten to wipe Israel off the map. It was a propaganda hoax!
it was a mistranslated statement (intentionally)
Originally posted by donk_316
Irans president... wants to have a debate with Bush Jr...
Originally posted by TheBandit795
Did you read my post?? Did I say that he's a peaceful man? No... If I tought he was peaceful, I would've said it... don't you think
That's what I'm asking. I'm not 100% sure whether MEMRI did the translation before it reached the western media. It seems like that though, and that's just my opinion.
Of course I may be wrong. But it looks that MEMRI translates the coverage of those stations and that most the Western media use that as their source. Not that they send their stories to Memri to be translated.
And yes, I know that the majority of people living in the Middle East hate Israel. You don't have to tell me that.
Ahmadinejad: Supporters of Israel will face wrath of Islamic ummah
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad warned countries or leaders who have taken measures to acknowledge the Zionist regime under pressure or due to lack of sound understanding that they will be confronted with the wrath of the Islamic ummah and will forever be disgraced. Speaking at a conference dubbed "World without Zionism" here Wednesday which was attended by thousands of students, he said any country which acknowledges the Zionist regime will actually be acknowledging the surrender and defeat of the Islamic world. He further expressed his firm belief that the new wave of confrontations generated in Palestine and the growing turmoil in the Islamic world would in no time wipe Israel away. Ahmadinejad referred to the Zionist regime's recent withdrawal from the Gaza Strip as a "trick," saying Gaza is part of Palestinian territory and the withdrawal was meant to make Islamic states acknowledge the Zionist regime of Israel. Pointing to the evil attempts of the US and Israel to saw discord among warring forces in Palestine and other parts of the Islamic world, the president said such attempts were aimed at forcing some Islamic countries to acknowledge the existence of Israel. .
Originally posted by donk_316
I just read a report on the recent visit of Irans president while he was in Malaysia and he makes some very valid points about
TEHRAN, Iran -- President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Tuesday challenged the authority of the UN Security Council as Iran faces a deadline to halt its uranium enrichment and he called for a televised debate with U.S. President George Bush on world issues.
The Security Council has given Iran until Thursday to suspend enrichment, a process that can produce either fuel for a reactor or material for weapons.
"The U.S. and Britain are the source of many tensions," Ahmadinejad said at a news conference. "At the Security Council, where they have to protect security, they enjoy the veto right. If anybody confronts them, there is no place to take complaints to.
"This (veto right) is the source of problems of the world. ... It is an insult to the dignity, independence, freedom and sovereignty of nations," he said.
Ahmadinejad rejected any suspension of enrichment, even if UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan asked for it during an upcoming visit to Iran.
"The use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes is the right of the Iranian nation. The Iranian nation has chosen this path. ... No one can prevent it," he said.
Iran last week responded to a Western incentives package aimed at getting Tehran to roll back its nuclear program. Iranian officials said the Islamic country did not agree to halt enrichment -- the key demand -- before engaging in further talks. continues
And the fact he wants to have a debate with Bush Jr is awesome..Ofcourse the blundering baboon would never agree to it as he obviously could string enough words together to HAVE a debate. but i digress.
the report i read:
ctv.ca
mod edit to use "ex" tags instead of "quote" tags
Quote Reference.
[edit on 3-9-2006 by sanctum]
Mod Edit: CAP title
[edit on 3-9-2006 by kinglizard]
Originally posted by pepsi78
The war was lost any way, the only time when japan managed to atack on us soil
was on pearl harbor.
Originally posted by rich23
Good luck with this thread. If it takes off you'll get a lot of people wanting to take you on.
I had quite a good go with a thread asking WHY Iran is a threat to the US... when you ask people to come up with solid evidence, it's easier to see that there's very little solid stuff to go on. It's mostly propaganda and repetition...
Originally posted by golddragnet
Iran's president is alot more intelligent than Bush and he does speak well and makes valid points. I am defo on Iran's side, how dare Bush threaten the Iranian people
..................
2 - 9 November 2005
Issue No. 767
Region
When he said Israel should be "wiped off the map", it is not clear that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was aware of the fallout the statement would generate. The president's words have caused a storm of criticism and made headlines worldwide.
.............
Reformists, however, are not happy. Former president Mohamed Khatami criticised Ahmadinejad, saying, "those words have created hundreds of political and economic problems for us in the world," the Iranian news agency (IRNA) said. According to some reports, senior officials in the reformist camp have hinted that Ahmadinejad may have not been fully aware of the impact of his speech, which he addressed to a domestic audience of conservative Iranian students at a routine conference in Tehran ahead of the pro-Palestinian rally of Jerusalem Day, which always takes place on the last Friday of Ramadan. Some have begun to wonder whether Ahmadinejad has the political wisdom or acumen to lead Iran at such a crucial juncture.
Ahmadinejad himself refused to back down. He took part in Friday's rally and cheered by hundreds of thousands of supporters, insisted on his comments saying, "my words were the Iranian nation's words." He has also reportedly recalled the Iranian ambassador to Moscow as a result of his statements downplaying Ahmadinejad's comments.
While it is not uncommon for senior Iranian officials to criticise Israel, Ahmadinejad's comments, coming at a time of international suspicion regarding Iranian intentions, are likely to confirm fears that the recently elected president is reverting to a hard-line foreign policy. Over the preceding eight years of President Khatami's moderate style of government, reformists adopted a successful policy of reconciliation with both the West and the Arab world. During Khatami's era, Iranian officials stated more than once that they would accept what the Palestinians would agree to; a stance regarded at the time as a softening of Iran's position, leaving the path open for a two-state solution.
Ahmadinejad's defiant comments seem anything but pragmatic, leaving analysts with raised eyebrows as to their ultimate meaning. The timing of the comments is also significant, coming weeks before a crucial meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), from which Iran may be referred to the Security Council for possible sanctions. Adding fuel to fire, Ahmadinejad also said Sunday that, "Iran will not return to a full freeze of its disputed nuclear fuel activities," and that "Western demands for such confidence-building measures are unacceptable."
According to Iranian analyst Mohamed Sadeq Al-Husseini, Ahmadinejad's comments might well represent as a clear and bold message that Iran, unlike Syria, has decided that "attack is the best policy of defence." The message, according to Al-Husseini is that "Iran will not give up its legitimate right regarding peaceful nuclear activities." Al-Husseini argues that the message is not only directed at the US, "which is trying hard to curtail Iranian diplomacy [in its endeavour to reach a peaceful solution]," but also European negotiators, "which Tehran believes have procrastinated [in nuclear negotiations] and thus deserved to be blamed."
Originally posted by Astygia
Originally posted by TheBandit795
Originally posted by FlyersFanyes Iran is a threat to the US. It's also a threat to many other nations. The leader of that country has said many times what his intent is and he has said this publically and LOUDLY. Wipe certain countries off the planet and attack others. That's his motto.
MEMRI, anyone?? I hear Rich23 mentioning that organisation almost every day. Did the Iranian president actually say those words, or was it an invention by MEMRI???
So you postulate that the Iranian president is really a peaceful man, and all the bad things he says are lies developed by MEMRI? Do you really think Mehr, Iranian Voice, or al-Jazeera send their coverage to MEMRI before it's transmitted to our networks?
You ever been to the middle east? I have, 26 months spend mainly in Baghdad, Ramadi, and Kirkuk. 90% of middle-eastern arabs hate Israel. The Iraqis hate Israel. The Iranians in Iraq hate Israel (and there's plenty of Iranians in Iraq; they are there unofficially, and it's a toss-up as to whether they're organized or not. They are careful not to wear Hezbollah colors). Many soldiers going to Iraq are taught to say a few words in both standard Meso-Arabic (Iraq's primary language) and Farsi (Iran's primary langauge). Some of the words we learned are "Christian", and "Not Jewish". Because if you're captured and you're Jewish, you're dead.
The point I'm making is, you sit in your comfy chair and expect your speculations to be taken seriously, without knowing the reality of the situation. Is the government straightforward with us? Hell no. But there's a serious leap between recognizing that, and assuming every shred of international input we hear is a carefully manufactured lie. If that were the case, it would be logical for me to consider you an agent of disinformation, since you have not proven otherwise. But in that way lies madness.
Originally posted by Muaddib
Originally posted by golddragnet
Iran's president is alot more intelligent than Bush and he does speak well and makes valid points. I am defo on Iran's side, how dare Bush threaten the Iranian people
..................
I usually read people making claims that the U.S. president can't speak english, etc, etc, etc, yet usually those same people don't have a basic understanding of the English language and their grammar sucks. I guess it is some kind of projection of themselves these people keep proclaiming...
BTW, when someone says that a political figure is intelligent and that political figure is looking for the extermination of a nation, stating so several times to the world...all i have to say is... How can people be that naive...this man is intelligent because he wants the destruction of another nation?....
Anyways...this is one article from the Middle East but i am certain some will try to claim "it is propaganda"....
2 - 9 November 2005
Issue No. 767
Region
When he said Israel should be "wiped off the map", it is not clear that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was aware of the fallout the statement would generate. The president's words have caused a storm of criticism and made headlines worldwide.
.............
Reformists, however, are not happy. Former president Mohamed Khatami criticised Ahmadinejad, saying, "those words have created hundreds of political and economic problems for us in the world," the Iranian news agency (IRNA) said. According to some reports, senior officials in the reformist camp have hinted that Ahmadinejad may have not been fully aware of the impact of his speech, which he addressed to a domestic audience of conservative Iranian students at a routine conference in Tehran ahead of the pro-Palestinian rally of Jerusalem Day, which always takes place on the last Friday of Ramadan. Some have begun to wonder whether Ahmadinejad has the political wisdom or acumen to lead Iran at such a crucial juncture.
Ahmadinejad himself refused to back down. He took part in Friday's rally and cheered by hundreds of thousands of supporters, insisted on his comments saying, "my words were the Iranian nation's words." He has also reportedly recalled the Iranian ambassador to Moscow as a result of his statements downplaying Ahmadinejad's comments.
While it is not uncommon for senior Iranian officials to criticise Israel, Ahmadinejad's comments, coming at a time of international suspicion regarding Iranian intentions, are likely to confirm fears that the recently elected president is reverting to a hard-line foreign policy. Over the preceding eight years of President Khatami's moderate style of government, reformists adopted a successful policy of reconciliation with both the West and the Arab world. During Khatami's era, Iranian officials stated more than once that they would accept what the Palestinians would agree to; a stance regarded at the time as a softening of Iran's position, leaving the path open for a two-state solution.
Ahmadinejad's defiant comments seem anything but pragmatic, leaving analysts with raised eyebrows as to their ultimate meaning. The timing of the comments is also significant, coming weeks before a crucial meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), from which Iran may be referred to the Security Council for possible sanctions. Adding fuel to fire, Ahmadinejad also said Sunday that, "Iran will not return to a full freeze of its disputed nuclear fuel activities," and that "Western demands for such confidence-building measures are unacceptable."
According to Iranian analyst Mohamed Sadeq Al-Husseini, Ahmadinejad's comments might well represent as a clear and bold message that Iran, unlike Syria, has decided that "attack is the best policy of defence." The message, according to Al-Husseini is that "Iran will not give up its legitimate right regarding peaceful nuclear activities." Al-Husseini argues that the message is not only directed at the US, "which is trying hard to curtail Iranian diplomacy [in its endeavour to reach a peaceful solution]," but also European negotiators, "which Tehran believes have procrastinated [in nuclear negotiations] and thus deserved to be blamed."
weekly.ahram.org.eg...