Ahmadinejad tells West: Accept Israel imminent collapse

Originally posted by birchtree

....he said the land would be established and he would call them home(not a quote) it did not say the middle eastern jew or the europeon jew.

Really think about it

Thank you for your response.

The Iranian leader appeared to be sincere in his conviction. He did not seem interested in winning friends but just said what he believed without fear or favor

Who constitutes Israel and who has usurped the name as prophecied in the bible is probably outside the scope of this thread. The land was gods and he allowed Jacob's tribal descendents to live in it providing they kept to the terms of the contract they had entered into with him.

The kingdom was split c 935bc into two nations by the hand of god as the bible states. One nation remained a kingdom ruling over a single "loaned" tribe, and the other became a republic with chieftain rulers. Within two centuries, the majority northern Israel nation completely dissolved their contract under their ruler called Omri and shortly thereafter were expelled from the land c 730bc and exit the bible account from that time. These were the holders of the Abrahamic promises given by god unconditionally before the later contract and any reoccupation of "Palestine" can only be realised in these people.

The southern kingom held the rulership and lawmaking function for a temporary period until Shiloh should come and having seen what became of the other nation, continued to pay lipservice to the contract until they too went into captivity under a new regional power based in Babylon a couple of centuries later. These did not possess the promises of Abraham, Jerusalem was never their city, and they have no rights to possession of the land excepting as a minor part of the unified whole which, at this time remains two nations in enmity against each other.

Those few of the southern kingdom who returned from babylon in a time of grace brought teachers with them who taught them a tradition which took the place of their scriptures. Four centuries later, under the constant reinforcing by their teacher class, this tradition had become their daily religion.
The Christ spoke very harshly concerning their reliance upon the tradition of the elders and their failure to know the scriptures which could have shown them the truth.
Similarly today we have a "judeo-christian" tradition with teachers who again subvert the truth of the scripture in favor of a deceiving tradition.
Today, as in the previous age, the scripture is no longer "heard" but is "used" in fragmentation to reinforce the traditions of men.

It is this "tradition" which is craftily maintained to support the Israeli political situation which is at the heart of the present day debate and persuades a world christian population to unwittingly rebel against their god.

There is a hidden paradox in that the Iranian political situation is itself a creation of this same creature which deceives the judeo-christian follower into believing he must soon go to war against Iran. Armageddon is a desirable objective to this creature as by it they intend to reduce the population of the world to a level of sustainable management. (theirs)

I say that if we return to believing the scriptures, humble ourselves in prayer as a nation as we once did, that god will hear, extend a period of grace and heal our land. He will take care of the terrorist within and our external enemies will collapse like the pack of cards structure that they are.

reply to post by IvanZana


I feel that the Iranian President is trying to get people to turn on Isreal. Especially since Isreal is a United States ally. Another member stated in this thread about a "terrorist group taking credit for bombing Isreal"
, and the U.S. will tie the terrorist group to Iran. The U.S would then move against Iran. Then Russia and China would back Iran and move in to support Iran. Most contries around have treatise of protection, or treatise of mutal assistance. That is basically how WW1 got started.

For argument's sake, let's say with the variety of countries in the above map, most people would be able to find the Muslim country that suits them and their religious beliefs the best. Can they do that instead of denying Israel this one little minute sliver of land? It seems the Muslims have many nations to choose from. Israel has one.

Yes. It looks like greed and a spiritual battle to me.

Well heres an idea, what if America felt so guilty over the carnage in Darfur it relocated the entire population in Manhattan, after a while these people threw out all of the original occupants and then took over control of Brooklyn as well, making life impossible for those who live there.

Side stepping the religious arguments of the jewish right to Israel this would be your modern day equivalent, I cant imagine many Amercans would support this idea.

Originally posted by tarichar

For argument's sake, let's say with the variety of countries in the above map, most people would be able to find the Muslim country that suits them and their religious beliefs the best. Can they do that instead of denying Israel this one little minute sliver of land? It seems the Muslims have many nations to choose from. Israel has one.

Yes. It looks like greed and a spiritual battle to me.

Well heres an idea, what if America felt so guilty over the carnage in Darfur it relocated the entire population in Manhattan, after a while these people threw out all of the original occupants and then took over control of Brooklyn as well, making life impossible for those who live there.

Side stepping the religious arguments of the jewish right to Israel this would be your modern day equivalent, I cant imagine many Amercans would support this idea.

Strawman argument that isn't close to being applicable. Now if you said Native Americans you would have a better choice since the land was there's first. Just like the land Israel has was Jews land first. The reason why this is even an issue is because of the hate that islam and muslims have for anyone not of their belief. It has nothing to do with the land, and hearing muslims try to claim Jerusalem as their holy city is laughable. Jews built the city centuries before islam was invented.

Why would anyone want to upset Israel? World-leaders know that if they attempt to destroy Yisrael (Israel), they'll be punished as the Egyptians & others, who wanted to own that country, decades ago.

1. Jews whenever possible, build there houses of prayer facing Jerusalem, and face Jerusalem when praying.

Muslims face Mecca.

2. Jews are commanded to journey to Jerusalem whenever possible to observe the pilgrim festivals of Pesach (Passover), Shavuot (Pentecost), and Succoth (Tabernacles).

Muslims are not required ever to set foot in Jerusalem or any part of Israel, Instead they are required to make the Haj to Mecca at least once in there lives.

3. The word 'Jerusalem' appears in the Torah (to the best of my recollection) over 600 times.

The word 'Jerusalem' does not appear in the Koran even once - either in it's hebrew Yerushalayim or it's arabicised names such as 'Al Quds' or other Arabic variants.

4. All the main holy sites of Judaism are in Israel.

All the main holy sites in Islam are in greater Arabia.

5. The Jews have fought to defend Israel many times from invaders such as the Greeks and Romans. They were the only nation to twice rebel against the Romans. Chanukah - an important Jewish Festival, commemorates one such successful defence.

The Muslim nations have invaded Israel at every opportunity.

6. Jews have always considered themselves to be exiles in any nation other than Israel and have longed for centuries to return.

Muslims yearn for Mecca and visit it in their millions.

7. Ehud Olmert was born in Binyamina in the British Mandate of Palestine.

Yasr Arafat was born in Egypt.

8. Israel launched no missiles at civilian targets in Gaza - or to name it correctly Judea and Samaria in the last ten days.

9. Hamas fired over two hundred missiles at civilian targets in Israel in the same time period.

Yasr Arafat was born in Egypt.

10. Jews have no other Jewish state in the world to go to.

There are 22 Muslim nations in the middle east where the 'Palestinians' could go to.

Blah, blah, blah...

I could say more, but it's late here and I'm tired, so I won't.

I'm aware that none of the above proves anything in particular about who is right or wrong - I'm just musing...

Be Well!

Shalom Aleichem - Salaam wa Alaikum - Pax







[edit on 3-2-2008 by Albin]

[edit on 3-2-2008 by Albin]

[edit on 3-2-2008 by Albin]

10. Jews have no other Jewish state in the world to go to.

That's not true! The jews can go back into the legal borders of Israel.





[edit on 3-2-2008 by ergoli]

Originally posted by Albin
1. Jews whenever possible, build there houses of prayer facing Jerusalem, and face Jerusalem when praying.

Muslims face Mecca.

2. Jews are commanded to journey to Jerusalem whenever possible to observe the pilgrim festivals of Pesach (Passover), Shavuot (Pentecost), and Succoth (Tabernacles).

Muslims are not required ever to set foot in Jerusalem or any part of Israel, Instead they are required to make the Haj to Mecca at least once in there lives.

3. The word 'Jerusalem' appears in the Torah (to the best of my recollection) over 600 times.

The word 'Jerusalem' does not appear in the Koran even once - either in it's hebrew Yerushalayim or it's arabicised names such as 'Al Quds' or other Arabic variants.

4. All the main holy sites of Judaism are in Israel.

All the main holy sites in Islam are in greater Arabia.

5. The Jews have fought to defend Israel many times from invaders such as the Greeks and Romans. They were the only nation to twice rebel against the Romans. Chanukah - an important Jewish Festival, commemorates one such successful defence.

The Muslim nations have invaded Israel at every opportunity.

6. Jews have always considered themselves to be exiles in any nation other than Israel and have longed for centuries to return.

Muslims yearn for Mecca and visit it in their millions.

7. Ehud Olmert was born in Binyamina in the British Mandate of Palestine.

Yasr Arafat was born in Egypt.

8. Israel launched no missiles at civilian targets in Gaza - or to name it correctly Judea and Samaria in the last ten days.

9. Hamas fired over two hundred missiles at civilian targets in Israel in the same time period.

Yasr Arafat was born in Egypt.

10. Jews have no other Jewish state in the world to go to.

There are 22 Muslim nations in the middle east where the 'Palestinians' could go to.

Blah, blah, blah...

I could say more, but it's late here and I'm tired, so I won't.

I'm aware that none of the above proves anything in particular about who is right or wrong - I'm just musing...

Be Well!

Shalom Aleichem - Salaam wa Alaikum - Pax







[edit on 3-2-2008 by Albin]

[edit on 3-2-2008 by Albin]

[edit on 3-2-2008 by Albin]

Excellent research!!!! Thank you!!!!!

reply to post by US Monitor


Thats absolute BS, do you actually have any Muslim friends?

The terrorist attacks you hear about are not a representation of main stream islam, it would be like saying that all christians would like to see a return of the Spanish inquisition. To say all Muslims want to join Al-Qaida is to say that all christians want to join the church that pickets the funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq.

Any Muslim with half a bran will tell you that their religion is founded upon both Judaism and Christianity, in fact in Islam people of all judaeo-christian beliefs are referred to as 'people of the book' and are given specialist rights and protections. The term 'infidel' actual refers to people who have polytheist and animist beliefs.

This is not a question of Islam vs Judaism, its about the Israeli state vs palestinians, druze and bedouin (who are not all Muslim).

reply to post by paladin1852


All of these arguments are flawed because it is a conflict of nation states, not religion. The fact that Israel was created as a state for Jews and that the majority of palestinians are Muslim are simply superficial. It would not matter if it were the other way around or if Israel was the home of those who worship Coke and Palestine the land of Pepsi.

Religion is without reason, you cannot make a reasoned argument using religion.

Originally posted by tarichar
All of these arguments are flawed because it is a conflict of nation states, not religion.

I assure you it is a religious conflict at its very core even if they try to use the land argument as a red herring. Listen to some of the speeches anti-Zionist Muslims give about Israel. They almost always mention Allah in some way and how the Jews need to be removed from the land for the sake of Islam. Israel has given up so much land for "peace." Every treaty they sign has something to do with giving up more land. Once they do so and fulfill their end of the bargain, the invasions and attacks fail to cease. And they won't cease until they get what they want: Israel completely wiped off the land.

Originally posted by AshleyD

Originally posted by tarichar
All of these arguments are flawed because it is a conflict of nation states, not religion.

I assure you it is a religious conflict at its very core even if they try to use the land argument as a red herring. Listen to some of the speeches anti-Zionist Muslims give about Israel. They almost always mention Allah in some way and how the Jews need to be removed from the land for the sake of Islam. Israel has given up so much land for "peace." Every treaty they sign has something to do with giving up more land. Once they do so and fulfill their end of the bargain, the invasions and attacks fail to cease. And they won't cease until they get what they want: Israel completely wiped off the land.

What land has Israel given up? Over the past 60 years Israel has for the most part occupied land. 1948, violent insurrection results in the "nakbah" and the creation of Israel. 1956, the Suez Crisis, Israel occupies the Sinai. 1967, 6 day war, Israel occupies the Golan Heights, the Sinai, the West Bank and Gaza. 1973, Rammadan / Yom Kippur, Israel retains Sinai and Golan heights, the latter is yet to be returned despite being sovereign territory. 1982, Israel invades Souther Lebanon which it occupies until 2000. 2005, Israel removes settlers from Gaza.

Although responding, sometimes pre-empting, foreign aggression Israel has regularly shown a penchant for occupying sovereign territory.

From 1967 onwards Israel has been building settlements within the West Bank. These settlements are connected by highways protected by the military and solely for the use of Israeli's. As a result the West Bank has become separated in to various 'Bantustans'. Making a cohesive, geographically collated state impossible.

The pull out from Gaza was strategic, it was untenable for the military to continue protecting the settlers. It also looked good to the international community, as a step forward in the peace process. In fact it resulted in a prison of over 1.5m people, Gaza is the most densely populated place on the planet. Which as can be seen on the news is imploding with extremism and violence.

religious rhetoric is the red herring, its the oldest propaganda in the book., both side attempting to appear as religious martyrs so as to attract support from outside of the area.

What of the moderate American, European, Iranian and African Anti-zionist Jews? Who frequently make speeches against the Israeli occupation and tactics used within Palestine, devoid of messages from Allah.

reply to post by tarichar


Muslim and Arab nations have attacked Israel four major times since the rebirth of the nation of Israel. In every event, the Muslims/Arabs were the aggressors:
1948 War of Independence
1956 Sinai War
1967 Six Day War
1973 Yom Kippur War

In an odd turn of events, even when Israel won they still backed down and retreated. For instance, even though the Israelis recovered Jerusalem and the temple mount in 1967, they still allow the mount to be a place of Islamic worship. Fascinating! The Jews are only allowed to ascend the mount a few times a year. Can you imagine if Islam did such a thing to Israel? Winning something in a war and voluntarily granting it to Israel while putting themselves in the position of second fiddle? Me neither.

Why is the rebuilding of a Jewish temple an international matter? Why are the Muslims opposing this at all costs? Why is the U.N. drowning the attempt in red tape? Have you ever heard so much controversy surrounding a people's right to build a house of worship? Me neither.

The land of Palestine was international territory owned by Britain and Turkey prior to Israel becoming a nation again in 1948. The Israelis bought the land through peace treaties, trades of technology, and with money. They are making so many concessions to appease it blows my mind.

reply to post by AshleyD


1967 was a started by a pre-emptive strike against egyptian airfields by the Israelis.

1973 was started by Egyptian and Syria attempting to retake territory occupied by Israel....

yup its a piece of cake for any muslim pilgrim to enter israel and visit Al Aqsa.

Is this whole rebuilding of a place of religion supposed to be a smoke screen for your absolute failure to make a salient point?

Are you referring to fears that the Israelis could be damaging the foundations of Al Aqsa?

If you want red tape in terms of planning permission perhaps you should look at how difficult it is for a Palestinian to build a house, even if they own the land.

1948, was tantamount to ethnic cleansing involving the forced removal of thousands of people due to their race.

Originally posted by tarichar
1948, was tantamount to ethnic cleansing involving the forced removal of thousands of people due to their race.

Please forgive me if I sound ignorant or if it looks like I'm splitting hairs for that isn't my intention. But I was under the impression there was no such thing as the Palestinian race... that they were simply Arabs living in Palestine. Sort of like America. There is no such thing as the "American race." We are nothing more that different races of people living in a land that wasn't our "homeland," so to speak. Not that it makes a difference as to what happened. Just asking.

let us be reminded that the person who wrote revelations believed that the apocalypse would come in his lifetime, and that jerusalem is in its 26th incarnation as far as historians can tell.

reply to post by AshleyD


Dont worry about it, its a prime example of popular dis-information. The states within the middle east are very often made up of various different peoples but unified in a few key areas. The most notable is language, whilst there is a common form of arabic that is used in the press every country has a different dialect. Yes Palestinians are arabs, but they speak the palestinian dialect of arabic. A Lebanese person would struggle to communicate with a saudi. Americans and British people share a language but it is the dialect which forms our cultural and national identities (amongst other factors). The difference between the dialects of Arabic are far deeper than any differences in dialects of english. The Palestinians are a society that has cultural roots within Israel / Palestine that go back hunderds of years (continuously). The majority of Israelis have roots in Israel that go back continuously little more than 60 years.



[edit on 4-2-2008 by tarichar]

reply to post by AshleyD


So true.

reply to post by malcr


I didn't answer his question because I wanted to stick to the topic at hand, instead of being diverted to a new topic of discussion.

so, I will answer anyway.

by: IvanZana

Btw, why would Iran need Nuclear missiles? Are they not protected or at least supplied by the Chinese and Russian Governments?

for the same reason Israel has them, for deterrence. that's why they "would" want them. weather or not they are trying to get them, or have them....I don't know.

malcr,
I was not the one playing the political tactic here. I posed a question in the OP. he tried to divert discussion of that topic to something else. I merely tried to continue on the line of discussion originated by this thread.

Originally posted by Ji_Ranz
Accordingly, as he explained in depth in response to numerous questions, he does not object to the western creation of the "Israeli State" as a homeland for these homeless peoples because the west did make a deal with them to provide them with one, but he thinks that if the west wants to do such a thing, then they should do it somewhere in Europe or "in their own back yard instead of ours" as he put it.

ok. like ive said before. i can understand his frustration over the current status of the state if israel. and how it became to be.

but he should know full well that that kind of proposal would be a non-starter. there may be many reasons to believe that the creation of israel was wrong. but, it is there now. and billions and billions of dollars and resources have been invested into that state. there is no way the state of israel will just pack up and move out. he knows this. so why would he even suggest it as an option?

why not look for practicle solutions?

or has it gone to far now for the two sides, Plaistine and israel, to make peace? ( that was a rhetorical question. no need to answer. )