Ahmadinejad: Israel will "soon disappear"

[Flash Tizzle]

No, this is not an outdated thread that I've bumped. Just another round of ominous threats from our favorite Middle Eastern president.

 

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran's president said on Monday Israel would soon disappear off the map and that the "satanic power" of the United States faced destruction, in his latest verbal attack on the Islamic Republic's arch-enemies.

 

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was speaking at a gathering of foreign guests marking this week's 19th anniversary of the death of Iran's late revolutionary leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the official IRNA news agency said.

 

"You should know that the criminal and terrorist Zionist regime which has 60 years of plundering, aggression and crimes in its file has reached the end of its work and will soon disappear off the geographical scene," he said.

 

Turning to the United States, Ahmadinejad said the era of decline and destruction of its "satanic power" had begun.

 

Ahmadinejad, who often rails against the West, is expected to travel to Rome on Tuesday to attend a U.N. summit on global food security. It will be his first visit to western Europe since he won the presidency in 2005.

 

In Washington, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino described Ahmadinejad's comments as "that kind of rhetoric that just serves to further isolate the Iranian people".

 

U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack condemned the Iranian president's latest comments on Israel: "Again, more hateful vitriol coming from President Ahmadinejad."

 

(cont'd below at link)

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/i...261250620080603

 

Notice how he specifically says "geographical scene." Not this idea that has been thrown around in the past, when the term "whiped off the map" emerged, that it's simply a misunderstanding and he means it in the sense of Israel no longer having its formal title. At what point will everyone believe what he's saying is more than emtpy rhetoric? Atleast one of these scnearios are inevitable in my opinion --Israel attacks Iran's nuclear facilities or Iran detonates a nuclear device within Israel's borders. Read the quotes above and convince me ANY peaceful solutions can come out of it.

Edited June 3, 2008 by Flash Tizzle

[knightni]

He does realize that he'll be starting WW III then, right?

 

 

[jackie hayes]

I'm sure he was merely mistranslated.

 

The peaceful solution is probably that Ahmadinejad keeps talking like this but doesn't do anything. It's empty rhetoric. He doesn't have the stupidity to attack Israel, particularly with a nuke. Despite the criticism over the word choice, we would obliterate Iran if they nuked Israel (no matter who ends up president), and he knows it. This is just playing to his base.

[lostfan]

I'm sure he was merely mistranslated.

 

The peaceful solution is probably that Ahmadinejad keeps talking like this but doesn't do anything. It's empty rhetoric. He doesn't have the stupidity to attack Israel, particularly with a nuke. Despite the criticism over the word choice, we would obliterate Iran if they nuked Israel (no matter who ends up president), and he knows it. This is just playing to his base.

I was getting ready to type "yawn" but you just about said it. Move along, nothing to see.

[southsider2k5]

He does realize that he'll be starting WW III then, right?

 

That is what he wants. It would bring about the return of the final prophet and the end of the world, thus fulfilling his destiny.

[SoxFan562004]

I've seen a couple brief headlines and news clips saying that he isn't really popular with the Iranian people. Is there any truth to that?

[southsider2k5]

I've seen a couple brief headlines and news clips saying that he isn't really popular with the Iranian people. Is there any truth to that?

 

I have read a couple of stories to the effect as well. Internally he is viewed as weak at solving lots of the domestic problems plaguing Iran such as inflation, jobs shortages, and energy prices.

[lostfan]

I have read a couple of stories to the effect as well. Internally he is viewed as weak at solving lots of the domestic problems plaguing Iran such as inflation, jobs shortages, and energy prices.

All of which are far more important to them than any of the issues we've been beefing with them on for the last 30 years. Especially with the young people, there isn't so much of an anti-Western mentality among the people as a lot of us think, that's just how they get portrayed in our media.

[southsider2k5]

All of which are far more important to them than any of the issues we've been beefing with them on for the last 30 years. Especially with the young people, there isn't so much of an anti-Western mentality among the people as a lot of us think, that's just how they get portrayed in our media.

 

I'd be curious to really see what it is like on the ground there. I really doubt there is much love for America there.

[lostfan]

I'd be curious to really see what it is like on the ground there. I really doubt there is much love for America there.

Me too, but I'm under the impression that the people are pretty indifferent, and probably cynical about America for the most part. That they don't really care that much one way or the other.

[NorthSideSox72]

I'd be curious to really see what it is like on the ground there. I really doubt there is much love for America there.

I also really doubt its a nation full of people who hate the west. I'd have to guess that there is a lot of both, probably the younger generation being more open to what Western culture brings them, and the older generations more anti-American.

 

[FlaSoxxJim]

I also really doubt its a nation full of people who hate the west. I'd have to guess that there is a lot of both, probably the younger generation being more open to what Western culture brings them, and the older generations more anti-American.

 

Well, once we start bombing them at least we'll be able to unite those two camps in their anti-American sentiments.

[GoSox05]

I saw a interview with Henry Rollins who was able to get a visa to get into Iran. He said the people over there really like America, especially the younger kids. He got to eat dinner with your average working class Iranian family and he said they were more worried about paying bills and the daily grind than hating America or Israel.

[Nokona]

Guys, Ahmadinejad has next to no political power. He's effectively the figurehead of the government and just spouts off whenever he can. His own people know he's a blowhard.

[southsideirish71]

I saw a interview with Henry Rollins who was able to get a visa to get into Iran. He said the people over there really like America, especially the younger kids. He got to eat dinner with your average working class Iranian family and he said they were more worried about paying bills and the daily grind than hating America or Israel.

 

I am sure that the average German didn't hate America either in WWII.

 

[KipWellsFan]

A competent American President should have been able to spin this guy into the ground long ago. Mahmoud's an embarrassment.

Edited June 3, 2008 by KipWellsFan

[lostfan]

A competent American President should have been able to spin this guy into the ground long ago. Mahmoud's an embarrassment.

Iran thrives off the stereotypical "Great Satan" image. It gives validity to the whole BS rheotoric.

[southsider2k5]

I actually saw this in the Trib editorials the other day...

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion...0,5762538.story

 

Hearing footsteps in Iran?

 

June 3, 2008

 

Article tools

 

* EmailE-mail

* Share

o Digg

o Del.icio.us

o Facebook

o Fark

o Google

o Newsvine

o Reddit

o Yahoo

* PrintPrint

* ReprintReprints

* Post comment

* Text size:increase text sizedecrease text size

 

Iran's bull rush into the nuclear club is a popular rallying point for Iranian national pride. If there's much of an argument among the mullahs and top officials about the wisdom of continuing in the face of three sets of UN Security Council sanctions, there's not much public evidence of it.

 

That's why the election last week of former nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani to be the speaker of Iran's parliament was surprising. Before resigned after clashing with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Larijani reportedly favored some sort of a nuclear deal to ease Western pressure. He lost that argument—and his job as nuclear negotiator.

 

Now he's back. We don't want to read too much into his lopsided 232-31 victory. Larijani's only a moderate compared to ultra hard-liners like Ahmadinejad and his backers.

 

What's clear is that Larijani's rise is a direct rebuke to Ahmadinejad and his abysmal economic policies. Thousands of people across Iran suffered through rolling blackouts last winter, left without heat or electricity. Inflation is high. Jobs have dried up. And all this, even as Iran rakes in billions from oil. Try explaining that to Iranian citizens.

 

What's less clear is whether Larijani's election presages a change in Iran's defiance of the UN on its nuclear ambitions. Our guess: Probably not. In his first speech as speaker, Larijani showed no hint of giving ground to the Security Council's demand for a suspension of uranium enrichment. He lashed out at the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency, which accused Iran of continued stonewalling.

 

Larijani—and Iran—are playing an increasingly dangerous hand.

 

The latest report from the IAEA, made public last week, said Iran is gaining expertise in manufacturing more advanced centrifuges—a quicker and more efficient way to produce enriched uranium, which can be used in a bomb. A few days later, the chief U.S. delegate to the IAEA said evidence described by the nuclear watchdog suggests that Iran was secretly continuing research and testing on a nuclear arms program, even after U.S. intelligence agencies concluded that it had stopped. On Monday, IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei said that Iran appeared to be holding back information on its nuclear weapons program.

 

Ya think?

 

Are the mullahs worried enough to attempt to oust Ahmadinejad in next year's election? Hard to say. But Larijani couldn't have been elected to his new post without the consent of the country's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

 

The former nuclear negotiator and culture minister will likely challenge Ahmadinejad for the presidency. The two candidates couldn't be more different. Larijani's a polished diplomat, Ahmadinejad's known for his anti-Semitic rants. We hope Iranians are tiring of his act.

 

A few months ago a public opinion poll was released that probably froze the blood of Khamenei. It showed that almost 9 out of 10 Iranian voters want to directly elect their top political leader in a free vote. They don't want a leader for life. They demand accountability.

 

Who knows what could happen if Iranians get the notion that their country is heading, disastrously, in the wrong direction? Which it is.