I'm sorry, but what points did you make? Are you from Iran, or currently live there? How is it that you know everything, and no one else does?
Also, you used the New York Times in your post as a reference and nothing else to prove your points, whatever points they might be.
Lets see, Stigma means -Sign of social unacceptability: The shame or disgrace attached to something regarded as socially unacceptable. So what he said would mean that Israel is unacceptable and that he will wipe it from the face of the Islamic world. So tell me PrincessGarnet what that does mean, if it is not a threat against Israel. How else would he wipe Israel from the Islamic world? Please do tell what he meant by that. As far as I'm concerned, and a good portion of the world, it was a threat to Israel.
Well for reasons why Iran wants a nuclear weapon: 1. It will not be attacked, and there will be no forced regime change as has happened in Iraq, it’s neighbouring country 2. Israel has nuclear weapons 3. Diplomatic relations will have to be different 4. A country gets status with a nuclear weapon Concerning what was allegedly said: 1. It was not addressed to Israel 2. It was in a speech to students at an anti-Jew talk. - surely these are fundamental points???? People who go to an anti-Jew talk are obviously going to have a strong view against the Jewish occupation, the President needs support, so he obviously has to say things that will bring the crowd on side. There is also a different political culture there. Also, if you want to threaten a country with war, you do it in an international institute or a public address, you don't go to an extremist group at the local University and paraphrase the words of a past leader. I don’t claim to be an expert in Middle Eastern studies, but I’ve studied International Relations for the past 2 ½ years, and I live with someone who works in terrorism and political violence research – who will not shut up on middle eastern issues. I have also had tutorials and lectures by experts in Middle Eastern/Iranian politics, and went to talks by guess speakers. I would also like to add that I'm not a supporter of this regime, but to further demonise it and not accept that things aren't as simple as black and white I don't think does anyone any good.
I must say I am very impressed with with your response, sounds to me like money well spent on your education. As for me, I don't trust Iran. I feel that if given the chance to develope a nuclear weapon they would start to threaten other countries, or worse, give it to terrorist groups such as Hezbollah, Hamas, or even Al-Qaeda. I cannot say with certainty that they would give it to terrorists, or even use it, but I would rather not take that chance. I also think that the majority of the world feels that way, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion. As for his speech, you clearly already stated that he thinks they are a stigma. I don't believe he has ever spoken with Israel, nor do I think he ever will. Why? Because he gave a speech at an anti-Jewish talk. The sole purpose for giving a speech at an anti-Jewish talk is to talk bad about Jewish people and the state of Israel. If he liked Jewish people and the state of Israel, he wouldn't have gone at all, never mind say what he did. Also, the last time I checked when a president gives a speech in his own country (speech given in Tehran), and to his own people, how is it supposed to be treated. President Bush called Iran a member of the Axis of Evil to the American people in his State of the Union address. He has also said that about Iran whenever the topic comes up, no matter the setting. Because he gave that speech (and others) to his own people, the people of the United States now believe Iran to be part of that Axis. Under these same conditions (addressing own country), President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed his own people and called Israel a stigma, and said that they must be wiped from the face of the Islamic world. Coming from the President of their own country, wouldn't the people of Iran believe that their president is threating Israel?
PrincessGarnet, I just wanted to let you know that I have no hard feelings against you. Sometimes when people debate certain issues some people tend to believe that the other person doesn't like them, that is NOT the case. I just like to debate certain issues. Please don't take anything offensively, because that is not my intention. I just enjoy a good debate. Thanks, Ed
Hey no problem I feel the same I can sometimes get carried away in arguments but it's not against the person just the points made. Don't have time to answer the points made, but I agree I would prefer Iran didn't have the bomb.
Darn this conversation got interesting just as I left. Princess Garnet I'd just like to say that the Axis of Evil comment shouldn't make the Iranians fear imminent invasion. North Korea was on it, and now that they're moving away from building nuclear weapons the US is preparing a large aid package to help their starving people. Lybia was considered a de facto member, and they suddenly backed off their rhetoric, and weapons manufacturing. Now they're not exactly on the US's good list, but there has been a massive easing of pressure fromt he US in regards to Lybia, and monetary aid has begun flowing into the nation. In regards to Iran. Iran bombed the Isreali embassy in Argentinia killing approximately 200 people, in the 1980's. There are well known ties between Iran and Hamas, and Hezbellah, and pretty good evidence that Iran has been supporting the worst insurregents in Iraq and Afghanistan. They aren't exactly good neighbours. Also while the one quote may be misquoted there are several dozen more, and Iranian public tv demonizes Israel on a regular basis. Now they may not use nuclear weapons on Israel. I said as much in my original post, but these trends are worrisome.
Eventually. I prefer it end a long time from now, when the sun itself fails when its fuel is largely depleted.
