Author Topic: Dinner with Ahmadinejad  (Read 34563 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Dinner with Ahmadinejad
« Reply #15 on: September 26, 2007, 05:06:23 PM »
<< . . . but downplaying the very existence of the Shoah is the worst kind of demagouery. >>

IF that's what he's actually doing.  All I got from his latest utterances was a call for more study.  There are plenty of areas that could stand a little more study - - for example, what were the roles of the various American Zionist organizations in this?  (Not as simple and as uncomplicated as you might wish to think)   To what extent did U.S. corporations participate or benefit?  (Ford, IBM in particular)   The RCC, which under Pope John-Paul II first offered to open up its Holocaust-era archives to a joint commission of six Jewish and six RC historians, has since reneged on its offer.  The subject is enormous - - it presented terrifying moral dilemmas to literally millions of priests, soldiers, statesmen, spies, journalists, police officers and ordinary schoolchildren and housewives of all races and religions, it was a moral cataclysm of unprecedented dimensions, and if Ahmadinejad or anyone else says it needs more study, I would say, Go for it!

<<There are villains here (including Germany and Christian Europe) who have not been called to account in any meaningful way, there are victims turned defenders and aggressors (the Israelis) and there are victims turned terrorists the Palestinians), all three groups hanging onto jaded views of history protecting their prerogatives when history has passed them by.>>

Very well said.

<< It's a mess, and Ahamdinejad makes it considerably messier, invoking hate not compassion and reason.>>

Ahmadinejad himself and his country are a part of that mess.  They are caught up in the struggle of the Palestinians, with whom they have good reason and every right to sympathize, and I can certainly understand where that hate is coming from.  Not the most constructive way of dealing with the situation, but not exactly unjustified either; all the more reason why guys like him SHOULD study more about the Holocaust.  I saw the guy going backward, from denying the Holocaust to saying it needed more study.  I also heard him call Hitler evil and despicable.  In a way, I think whatever exchange of ideas (mainly one-way vituperation) has taken place since he first appeared to deny the Holocaust, seems to have had a positive effect on him, and I don't see why further exchanges of ideas wouldn't also produce more positive results.

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Dinner with Ahmadinejad
« Reply #16 on: September 26, 2007, 05:09:56 PM »
Quote
"...Ahmadinejad, 51, a layman with anti-Western views who was elected two years ago on a populist platform. His post is subordinate to those of the country's senior Shiite leader and his clerical advisers. ..."http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/25/AR2007092502448.html


Is this true?

If he was really elected on a populist platform then he is due the respect due to the voice of his people.

Was his election flawed so severely , by closeing down critics and opponents , that he does not deserve the respect of our nation for his because he does not deserve his own peoples respect?

Reguardless of all other consideration , should he receive respect because we have no better representitive of his people to show respect to?l

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Dinner with Ahmadinejad
« Reply #17 on: September 26, 2007, 05:15:45 PM »
<<Was his election flawed so severely , by closeing down critics and opponents , that he does not deserve the respect of our nation for his because he does not deserve his own peoples respect?>>

Well, he didn't lose the popular vote, only to have the victory handed to him anyway by a politicized Supreme Court, if that's what you're getting at.

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Dinner with Ahmadinejad
« Reply #18 on: September 26, 2007, 05:24:24 PM »
<<Was his election flawed so severely , by closeing down critics and opponents , that he does not deserve the respect of our nation for his because he does not deserve his own peoples respect?>>

Well, he didn't lose the popular vote, only to have the victory handed to him anyway by a politicized Supreme Court, if that's what you're getting at.


Nor did Bush ever have Canadate Gore or even canadate Nader jailed if that is what you are getting at.



I don't know .

If he is really the winner of a real election then we should be honor bound to respect him as the voice of his people.

If he is not, then not .

So the statement " elected on a populist platform" seems key to me , but is it the truth?

Christians4LessGvt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11139
    • View Profile
    • "The Religion Of Peace"
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Dinner with Ahmadinejad
« Reply #19 on: September 26, 2007, 05:51:15 PM »


Most Iranian Presidential candidates were "disqualified" by the Guardian Council, which holds veto power over all political candidates in Iran.



"Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" - Ronald Reagan - June 12, 1987

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Dinner with Ahmadinejad
« Reply #20 on: September 26, 2007, 06:03:51 PM »
Thank God for Wikipedia and hyperlinking.  The Guardian Council is appointed by the Supreme Leader and the other half by the Supreme Leader's nominee.  Six clerics and six judges.  These folks are NOT living in some kind of Jeffersonian democracy.

What's with this sudden fetish regarding legitimacy based on the choice of the people?  I'll bet whatever controls were imposed over Ahmadinejad's election, they weren't anywhere near as tight as those relating to Hosni Mubarak, the King of Jordan, the Emir of Kuwait  or the rulers of Saudi Arabia and nobody is questioning their legitimacy.

gipper

  • Guest
Re: Dinner with Ahmadinejad
« Reply #21 on: September 26, 2007, 06:24:30 PM »
Yes, Michael, from what does legitimacy emanate, ideally, realistically, in international law ...?

Christians4LessGvt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11139
    • View Profile
    • "The Religion Of Peace"
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Dinner with Ahmadinejad
« Reply #22 on: September 26, 2007, 06:59:17 PM »
nobody is questioning their legitimacy

maybe because they are not about to cause WW3
"Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" - Ronald Reagan - June 12, 1987

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Dinner with Ahmadinejad
« Reply #23 on: September 26, 2007, 08:03:11 PM »
<<Yes, Michael, from what does legitimacy emanate, ideally, realistically, in international law ...?>>

I would guess in international law it springs from simple de facto control of a nation and the absence of a legitimate government in exile with a realistic shot at regaining power.

Ideally, I guess, it would have to meet certain moral standards of conduct but I don't think the international law is concerned with that.   My rights as a citizen certainly don't depend on how I conduct myself morally and a nation in a community of nations, I would think, would be in an analogous situation.  Practically speaking, moral standards DO intrude - - the U.S. did not recognize the U.S.S.R. until Roosevelt's first term, the non-recognition being allegedly due to moral flaws in the "Bolshevik" government.  ("They shot their own Czar!")  Similarly the U.S. non-recognition of Communist China, but in that case there was at least the fiction of a functioning and real Chinese government in exile on Taiwan.  It's interesting, OTOH, to note how quickly recognition came to Franco's fascist state after he overthrew the Spanish Republic by force of arms, with Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy helping.

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Dinner with Ahmadinejad
« Reply #24 on: September 26, 2007, 08:06:48 PM »
MT:  <<nobody is questioning their [Egypt's, Kuwait's, Jordan's, Saudi Arabia's] legitimacy

CU4:  <<maybe because they are not about to cause WW3>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the quavering gibberish from the edge of hysteria calling in

 Better lay in plenty of fresh water for your radiation shelter.  Don't forget the canned veggies.

Christians4LessGvt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11139
    • View Profile
    • "The Religion Of Peace"
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Dinner with Ahmadinejad
« Reply #25 on: September 26, 2007, 11:18:07 PM »
the quavering gibberish from the edge of hysteria calling in

 Better lay in plenty of fresh water for your radiation shelter.  Don't forget the canned veggies.


i must admit that is funny michael
but i only wish it were true
i sincerely believe if we don't stop iran now
we could see armageddon in our lifetime



 
 
"Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" - Ronald Reagan - June 12, 1987

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Dinner with Ahmadinejad
« Reply #26 on: September 26, 2007, 11:33:02 PM »
I wouldn't go near so far as to claim "armageddon", but I do find a scary trend how in so many generations, there seems to jump up some "group" that wants to rid the world of Jews
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Henny

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1075
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Dinner with Ahmadinejad
« Reply #27 on: September 27, 2007, 08:00:44 AM »
Thank God for Wikipedia and hyperlinking.  The Guardian Council is appointed by the Supreme Leader and the other half by the Supreme Leader's nominee.  Six clerics and six judges.  These folks are NOT living in some kind of Jeffersonian democracy.

What's with this sudden fetish regarding legitimacy based on the choice of the people?  I'll bet whatever controls were imposed over Ahmadinejad's election, they weren't anywhere near as tight as those relating to Hosni Mubarak, the King of Jordan, the Emir of Kuwait  or the rulers of Saudi Arabia and nobody is questioning their legitimacy.

I have read a LOT in the past about the Iranian people questioning his legitimacy. The problem with that is, we don't know what news is which coming from Iran. We might just be seeing protest pieces rather than mainstream. I'll try to dig some of that up.

Henny

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1075
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Dinner with Ahmadinejad
« Reply #28 on: September 27, 2007, 08:29:55 AM »
I have read a LOT in the past about the Iranian people questioning his legitimacy. The problem with that is, we don't know what news is which coming from Iran. We might just be seeing protest pieces rather than mainstream. I'll try to dig some of that up.

And after looking around, I'm not so sure what information I had before. The following is similar to everything I'm seeing today:

Profile: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who was elected Iran's president in June 2005, was an obscure figure when he was appointed mayor of Tehran in the spring of 2003.
He was not much better known when he entered the presidential election campaign, although he had already made his mark as Tehran mayor for rowing back on earlier reforms.

Since his election he has taken a tough stand on a number of foreign policy matters, in line with his hard-line background.


His comments that Israel should be "wiped off the map" and that the Holocaust was a "myth" drew widespread condemnation from the West.

Revolutionary credentials

Mr Ahmadinejad was born in Garmsar, near Tehran, in 1956, the son of a blacksmith, and holds a PhD in traffic and transport from Tehran's University of Science and Technology, where he was a lecturer.

There has been confusion about his role in the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

Several of the 52 Americans who were held hostage in the US embassy in the months after the revolution say they are certain Mr Ahmadinejad was among those who captured them.

He insists he was not there, and several known hostage-takers - now his strong political opponents - deny he was with them.

His website says he joined the Revolutionary Guards voluntarily after the revolution, and he is also reported to have served in covert operations during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war.

When he became mayor of Tehran, the former revolutionary guard curtailed many of the reforms put in place by the moderates who had run the city before him.

Iran's outgoing reformist president, Mohammad Khatami, barred Mr Ahmadinejad from attending cabinet meetings, a privilege normally accorded to mayors of the capital.

Mr Ahmadinejad reportedly spent no money on his presidential campaign - but he was backed by powerful conservatives who used their network of mosques to mobilise support for him.

He also had the support of a group of younger, second-generation revolutionaries known as the Abadgaran, or Developers, who are strong in the Iranian parliament, the Majlis.

His presidential campaign focused on poverty, social justice and the distribution of wealth inside Iran.

Hard-line approach


During his campaign, he also repeatedly defended his country's nuclear programme, which has worried the US and European Union.

Once in power, he made a defiant speech at the UN on the nuclear issue and refused to back down on Tehran's decision to resume uranium conversion.

He continued his defiance despite the reporting of Iran's nuclear programme to the UN Security Council and the possible threat of sanctions.


He said no power could take away Iran's right to nuclear fuel technology.

Mr Ahmadinejad has maintained a hard line with the US, with whom diplomatic ties were broken in 1979.

At home, he banned Western and "indecent" music from state-run TV and radio stations in December 2005.

However, BBC analyst Sadeq Saba says there have been moves inside Iran to rein in the president.

'Confrontational'

Powerful figures such as former President Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani believe Mr Ahmadinejad's confrontational approach has backfired.

They say the US struggled to report Iran to the Security Council for a long time, but with Mr Ahmadinejad's help Washington got what it wanted in a few months.

Mr Ahmadinejad has now made some small-scale concessions to moderates. He said he would not be confrontational in enforcing a campaign in Tehran to insist women obeyed Iran's strict Islamic dress codes.


He has also allowed women into major sporting events for the first time since 1979.

Mr Ahmadinejad maintains a populist streak, calling his personal website Mardomyar, or the People's Friend.

He also has a reputation for living a simple life and campaigned against corruption.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/4107270.stm

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Dinner with Ahmadinejad
« Reply #29 on: September 27, 2007, 11:21:39 AM »
<<i sincerely believe if we don't stop iran now
we could see armageddon in our lifetime>>

Won't be in MY lifetime, 4, I'm a pretty old bird.  Remotely possible in my kids' lifetime and they're in their mid-30s.  Can't predict what's in store for the grandchildren, they haven't started school yet. 

Whatever remote chance there is of a nuclear Armageddon, IMHO, would be far more likely to result from the aggressive policies of the U.S.A. than the actions of any other nation on earth, Iran included.  Just as the Balkans, often called "the tinderbox of Europe" in the 1930s, did not precipitate the European phase of WWII, but "civilized" Germany did, so I believe that the U.S. and its undeviating foreign policy of aggression and self-aggrandizement is the likeliest candidate to plunge the world into similar hostilities, particularly as it enters its declining phase. 

The likeliest road to Armageddon that I see (and please keep in mind this is a very remote possibility) is a series of small wars, picked with smaller but resource-rich countries without no major allies to defend them, usually ending favourably or unfavourably for the aggressor depending on the amount of backbone its victim can muster, and (hopefully) ending in an increasing number of humiliating defeats, each one pushing the aggressor deeper and deeper into the ambient culture of fascism and militarism.  The danger, as always, lies in underestimating the strength of the intended victim, in an age of knowledge and technology explosion.  One day the U.S. will pick what seems to be a pushover and learn to their surprise that the "pushover" or its friends and sympathizers have the means to deliver knockout WMD blows to major U.S. targets.  This would result in an irrational explosion of anger in the U.S., and indiscriminate attacks on the original victim and its perceived allies and enablers, which in turn could result in further severe repercussions on the U.S.A., possibly including some from unexpected quarters.  This is the Doomsday Scenario as I see it.

The model I have in mind is Nazi Germany and its allies - - an unshakeable conviction of the right to rule resulting in an alliance of the rest of the entire world, including the unlikely alliance of England and the U.S. with France, Russia and China.  The U.S. could unite most of the world against it.  If its present policies continue long enough without modification (an extremely unlikely event, IMHO) then the natural result would be to unite the world against them.

The other Armageddon model is 1914.  The continuing policies of U.S. aggression force-feed a natural trend for resource-rich countries who are potential targets to seek alliances with other big powers, likely the newer or still-developing ones like China, India or Russia.  Not all of them publicly known.  Secret diplomacy returns.  A few miscalculations, a strike on a target with friends and a really devastating counter-strike.