IRAN-Deja vu all over again?

by JWdaughter 318 Replies latest social current

  • freydo
    freydo

    Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei Declares That Islamic Nations Will One Day Witness The Absolute Destruction Of Israel

    "Prior to World War 2, Adolf Hitler made all kinds of inflammatory statements, but most world leaders dismissed them. They simply refused to believe that the madman was actually serious about what he was saying. We can look back now and see what a big mistake that was, but the truth is that current world leaders have not learned from the mistakes of the past. Today Iranian leaders continue to publicly state over and over that they look forward to wiping Israel off the map, but over and over world leaders do not seem to be taking these statements seriously. For example, the official website of Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is reporting that he just told Mauritanian President Mohammed Ould Abdel Aziz that one day the Islamic nations of the world will witness the absolute destruction of the state of Israel. Considering the fact that Khamenei is the most powerful person in Iran, you would think that someone would be alarmed by that statement.

    The following is an English translation of an excerpt from Khamenei's statement....

    "Surely, the day will come when the nations of the region will witness the destruction of the Zionist regime... when the destruction happens will depend on how the Islamic nations approach the issue."

    It is this kind of talk that is bringing the world ever closer to World War 3, and yet most of the world yawns when they hear statements such as this apparently because they don't believe that we should take people like Khamenei seriously. But this is a nation that has one of the most powerful militaries on the planet and that is on the verge of getting nuclear weapons. For religious madmen who openly sponsor and support terror groups to possess nuclear weapons is a combination that will endanger the entire world. And they are religious madmen. For example, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is claiming that the United States is purposely attempting to block the return of the Mahdi.............."

    Posted January 27, 2010 at 10:46 pm

  • HappyGuy
    HappyGuy

    llbh,

    Your ability to shift and twist things around in order to deflect accounatability away from your beloved Democrat party just amazes me.

    Yes, I know the shah was totalitarian, I watched the news every day when the people of Iran were overthrowing him.

    No, the Ayatollah Khomeni did not overhtrow the shah, the people of Iran did that while Khomeni hid abroad. Khomeni was brought to Iran to steal the results of the revolution from the people of Iran by the French with the approval of Jimmy Carter. The Iranian people did not want a religious government, they wanted a secular government, most of them did not even know who Khomeni was, to many he was a comic book character.

    I was a young adult when this was going on and watched it on the news everyday. Perhaps you should read some history books since you obviously don't know what your talking about.

    I'm not sure what Bush and Iraq have to do with the point I was making about Carter making it possible for the radicals to take power in Iran from the secular revolutionaries who overthrew the shah.

    The current regime is our enemy, they were emboldened by Jimmy Carter's do nothing policy, they are further emobldened by Obama's group hug policy. Their goal is to unleash a nuclear holocaust on the west. We have to smash them before they are able to do that. If the peopel of Iran want to remove the radicals so that we don't have to, that's okay but they better get on with it because we cannot afford to allow those lunatics to obtain nuclear weapons.

  • leavingwt
    leavingwt

    US raises stakes on Iran by sending in ships and missiles

    Pentagon says Patriot shield will deter strike on American allies in the Gulf

    Tension between the US and Iran heightened dramatically today with the disclosure that Barack Obama is deploying a missile shield to protect American allies in the Gulf from attack by Tehran.

    The US is dispatching Patriot defensive missiles to four countries – Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Kuwait – and keeping two ships in the Gulf capable of shooting down Iranian missiles. Washington is also helping Saudi Arabia develop a force to protect its oil installations.

    American officials said the move is aimed at deterring an attack by Iran and reassuring Gulf states fearful that Tehran might react to sanctions by striking at US allies in the region. Washington is also seeking to discourage Israel from a strike against Iran by demonstrating that the US is prepared to contain any threat.

    . . .

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jan/31/iran-nuclear-us-missiles-gulf

  • llbh
    llbh

    Happy Guy, you are wrong, I would be viewed to the right of centre here, I just happen to think that Obama is the right person to lead the US at the moment, both Nationally and internationally.

    I thought that Khomeini orchestrated his anointing as the Heir Apparent whilst exiled in France, so that when he arrived it was a done deal, I can see you know better, so I will defer to you.

    Agree with you about Carter, he was weak and vacillating. Interestingly one of the student leaders who lead the invasion of the US embassy was ... Ahmadinejad.

    My point about Bush is that he won the war but failed to win the peace, as he patently did not understand Iran and its position, he was guilty of hubris.

    The US can take on Iran militarily, no question, it can not win a war with them though, unless they wish to annihilate them as they will be formidable in defence. Also to be considered is how China will react.

    The actions of Obama (as highlighted by lwt) are to my mind the right way to proceed, ie carrot and a big stick.

    Interestingly I spoke to an Iranian friend of mine today, his viewpoint is similar to mine, that the moderates in Iran should be encouraged, and the hardliners discouraged, by such things as sanctions This Obama gets, and seems to be implementing. He also thinks that there is a groundswell of younger people that want change, and are westward looking, the west has an opportunity to have a positive influence, and to ameliorate the mistakes of the past.

  • HappyGuy
    HappyGuy
    My point about Bush is that he won the war but failed to win the peace, as he patently did not understand Iran and its position, he was guilty of hubris.

    Bush understood nothing about anything and threw away the most brilliant military operation in modern history, the early stages of the Afghan war which left the Taleban and al-Qaeda destroyed and had Osama Ben Laden and the remnants of the Taleban and al-Qaeda leadership trapped at Tora Bora, but Bush let him escape for want of 800 Army Rangers.

    I'm not sure what war you are talking about but we ahve not fought the coming war with Iran yet.

    I guess you are claiming that you understand Iran and its position?

    The US can take on Iran militarily, no question, it can not win a war with them though, unless they wish to annihilate them as they will be formidable in defence.

    Formidable in defence? The Iranian navy, air forces, and air defences would be obliterated in the first few hours of the war, their port facilities captured or destroyed, the oil refineries that supply them with gasoline off shore in the persian gulf either captured or blockaded. With no fuel the Iranian economy and war effort would collapse. Game over. Their nuclear capabilities would be destroyed. The US does not need to invade Iran to obtain those results.

    his viewpoint is similar to mine, that the moderates in Iran should be encouraged, and the hardliners discouraged

    And when your hero Obama had a perfect opportunity to encourage them, what did he do? He said that the internal affairs of Iran were not a US issue.

    He also thinks that there is a groundswell of younger people that want change, and are westward looking, the west has an opportunity to have a positive influence, and to ameliorate the mistakes of the past.

    I think the Revolutionary Guard may have something to say about how much of a groundswell for change the young people can be. The most positive influence that the west can have is in removing the criminals running Iran from power. Ameliorate the mistakes of the past? You mean like the act of war that the Iranian regime committed when they invaded our embassy and kidnapped our people?

    You can sing kumbaya with these freedom lovers in Iran all you want but the fact remains that we cannot afford to allow lunatics who have stated in public over and over again that they intend to launch a war of genocide to attain nuclear weapons.

  • HappyGuy
    HappyGuy
    Also to be considered is how China will react.

    China will puff up and squawk a lot but in the end do nothing. china cannot fight a modern war against the US.

  • freydo
    freydo

    (CNN) -- Two top Iranian opposition leaders have called on supporters to protest on February 11, the anniversary of the 1979 Islamic Revolution, an opposition Web site reported.

    According to The Green Way Web site, a meeting took place Saturday between opposition leaders Mehdi Karroubi and Mir Hossein Moussavi at Karroubi's home.

    They discussed the two executions that happened last week and the cases of 16 protesters who went on trial Saturday, the site reported.

    "The widespread arrests of political activists and university students, the silencing of the media, and the forced confessions of prisoners are against the principles of Islam and the constitution of Iran," the leaders said in a statement.

    Video: Why Iran FM defends crackdown

    Video: Iran hangs two men, but why?

    RELATED TOPICS

    They also called for people to take to the streets on February 11 to demand their rights back as citizens of Iran, The Green Way reported.

    Meanwhile, state-run Press TV quoted Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Sunday as saying that the nation will deliver a harsh blow to "global arrogance" on February 11.

    Press TV offered no details on or explanation of the statement........

  • llbh
    llbh

    We agree on many things Happy Guy. Yes America can annihilate Iran, and?? What is the end goal?? The US can win ideologically much more easily than militarily.

    The bellicosity of people like you encourage the hardliners.

    Obama should give more succor to moderates imo. BTW he is not my hero, just the right guy.

    How many Iranians do you know BTW Happy GUY?? My friend still has relatives there, so is well informed, his Brother in law was tortured and killed for speaking out. His opinion carries weight.

    You are wrong to be so sanguine about China as well, remember the Iran - Iraq war, who armed Iran - China? And China is far more powerful now.

    David

  • llbh
    llbh

    Thank you Freydo for your post, this demonstrates that the moderates are powerful and can win.

    Israel will deal with any Iranian nuclear threat on its own, with little reference to anyone.

    David

  • HappyGuy
    HappyGuy
    How many Iranians do you know BTW Happy GUY?

    Several dozen, both inside and out of Iran. If you count the Kurds in northern Iran as "Iranians" I know several hundred.

    You are wrong to be so sanguine about China as well, remember the Iran - Iraq war, who armed Iran - China? And China is far more powerful now.

    So a third world power armed another third world power with 1950s weaponry, big deal. I do consulting work for the US military, I know a little bit about the military capabilities of the countries you have mentioned.

    China is not "far more powerful" now. Get a grip. Their air force wouldn't last two hours against the US Air Force. Without air cover the ground forces are toast.

    Yes America can annihilate Iran, and?? What is the end goal?? The US can win ideologically much more easily than militarily.

    I didn't say to annihilate Iran, I said to remove the nuclear capabilities, air force, and navy, and to remove the regime which committed an act of war against us when they invaded our embassy. Where did I say annihilate Iran? The end goal is the removal of the lunatics running Iran who are threatening the world with a war of genocide, and a removal of the nuclear capabilities that these lunatics are building.

    I would agree that the US COULD win ideologically except that right now we have a Marxist Islamisist as our President and that ideology doesn't have very much appeal any more. So among our leaders where are the shining proponents of the freedom ideology that you are referring to? The current regime does not express that ideology.

    Also, we may not have time to win the ideological battle and we are foolish to take that chance. There are no do overs in nuclear war.

    The bellicosity of people like you encourage the hardliners.

    LOL, dude now you are just being delusional. The hardliners came to power while dealing with that pu$$y Jimmy Carter. If singing Kumbaya and having group hugs was going to sway the opinon of the hardliners Jimmy Carter was the perfect person to prove that with. Unlike you I have lived and traveled widely in the Middle East. The Iranian hardliners do not respect people who want group hugs, they only respect power and fear those who show a willingness to use it. The hardliners are driven by an ideology that is bloodthirsty, callous, and wants all or nothing. They don't want to sit down and talk with you, they want to murder you.

    Bellicosity? Let's see, our enemy has threatened a war of genocide if they attain nuclear weapons which they are urgently attempting to attain, and I say that they must be stopped before they launch their war, and I am the one that is being bellicose? And what of the people making these promises of genocide and striving to attain nuclear weapons? What are they? Tree huggers?

    Obama should give more succor to moderates imo.

    Yes, he should, but he isn't, so failing that, then what? We sit around and wait for the missiles to fall on our cities? Obama is never going to help the "moderates", he doesn't believe in the things they believe in, Obama is a Marxist Statist, he leans more to the side of the radical regime than he does the moderates.

    you also are making a false assumption. You assume that these "moderates" want a western style government and want to be allied with or friends with the west. What if that isn't what they want? What if they just want a more moderate version of the radical state they have? What if they have no intention of becoming friends with the west? What if their objections are practical in nature, that they see that Iran will be a stronger state if the radicalism is toned down?

    An insurrection is only successful because the insurrectionists are ready, willing, and able to suffer tremendous hardship in winning their insurrection. An insurrection can never succeed because any outside power wants it to, only the people fighting the insurrection can make it succeed. The Rumanians had ZERO outside support when they toppled Ceausescu in that mass demonstration on December 21. But, they had the will and the courage and the resolve to oust the hated dicatator. Can you say the same about the Iranians?

    The Iranians have it in their power to oust the radicals. They did it before. Only Jimmy Carter allowed the Ayatollah Khomeni to steal their revolution. There isn't anything that the United States can do to give the Iranian people the will, the courage, and the resolve to topple their dictators. We can give moral support, yes, but ultimately that isn't going to matter.

    You see, people in the Middle East do not trust the West, they have too many examples of their brethren standing up to tyrants after listening to promises from the West, only to be shot down like dogs in the street.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit