Iran a real and present threat?

[Poor Student]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4380306.stm

A segment from this story:

"Mr Ahmadinejad made his comments at a conference in the Iranian capital Tehran entitled The World without Zionism.

Referring to Iran's late revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Mr Ahmadinejad said: "As the imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map."

The Iranian foreign ministry later said Iran's embassies in the West would officially protest against Europe's attitude to "Zionist crimes"."

What in the hell was that? Foreign ministers all over the world have been registering their utter shock and disgust at this and some including our own have made a direct complaint to their respective embassies. I don't know if Ahmadinejad is just talking up some rhetoric to get himself heard or pander to the crowd or what exactly he's on about. Disgraceful stuff. Disturbingly rhetoric from Western leaders particularly Bush and Blair has been becoming more and more critical of Iran and talking about how they are becoming a genuine threat in attitude and actions from aiding terrorism to their nuclear policy. Could we have another war on our hands soon?

[Éanna]

IMO, the only danger Iran poses is if the US and the UK continue to try and back them into a corner- that could be when they lash out. The fact is that the guy's comments echo the feelings of the majority of people in his country and further afield. Its a bit much to talk about wiping another country off the map, but Israel has already wiped Palestine off the map, so they can hardly talk, can they. Its laughable to hear the nerve some of these "western" politicians have, proclaiming their disgust, Its a bit like Bin Laden having the cheek to complain that the "war on terror" is mean and unfair.

[dfx-]

Could we have another war on our hands soon?

I think it is inevitable.......but very avoidable if some people took a different stance..a less aggressive stance perhaps..

Ahmedinajad was voted in by his people well aware of his opinions and what he would do and very recently at that....there is no such need for 'regime' to change unless it is simply that you don't like the fact they don't agree with you..

[finlma]

I think he was just pandering to the crowd - it was a large group of students and he was trying to impress. That said I can easily see Iran being next on Bush's agenda. Lets hope not.
I'm not a fan of what Israel has done over the years and I despise Sharon - he was responsible for the massacre of a Palestinian village decades ago. Zionism only succeeded from post WW2 sympathy.

[Poor Student]

IMO, the only danger Iran poses is if the US and the UK continue to try and back them into a corner- that could be when they lash out.

I find that very naive Eanna. Iran clearly are a dangerous country with big ambitions and coming out with the rhetoric to boot. Noises today are that the President stands by his claims. I don't believe Iraq ever posed a threat but I do believe Iran does. I'm not sure what you mean by backing them into a corner. If Iran continues to escalate in levels of threat then it needs to be pushed to discontinue its ambitions.

The fact is that the guy's comments echo the feelings of the majority of people in his country and further afield.

That hardly makes it right. Hitler and countless questionable speakers of venomous rhetoric have aired the views of the multitudes over time. A responsible political elite should attempt to quell the flames of hatred, not fan them. The fact that this man, who leads the country, is the equivilent of a boorish unmannered pig who eats with his fingers and puts his feet on the table during dinner on the international stage is disturbing and shows potential for further erratic behaviour. Hitler stepped up with one level of audacity at a time until he had annexed Czechoslovakia and invaded Poland.

Its a bit much to talk about wiping another country off the map

Oh you think so, do you?

but Israel has already wiped Palestine off the map, so they can hardly talk, can they.

Don't get too hung up on the term Palestine. It's a geographical term, not a nation. It's very name is testement to the Romans attempting to take away any connection of an ethnic group to the region's name. But clearly the Israelis have not wiped the regions set aside for the Arab Palestinian state off the map. Indeed they're even widthdrawing from them. However even if what you said was so black and whitely accurate as you put it then you're saying two wrongs make a right.

Its laughable to hear the nerve some of these "western" politicians have, proclaiming their disgust, Its a bit like Bin Laden having the cheek to complain that the "war on terror" is mean and unfair.

I'm not laughing. It's an outright disgrace that one UN member says this about another. Now before you go on about the outright disgrace of Israel's atrocities, they don't change the disgracefulness of Iran's comments. I don't get your analogy at all. This is medeival state relations coming from Iran. Totally backward and out of context behaviour on the international stage. Western politicians are quite right to disgusted.

[Éanna]

I find that very naive Eanna. Iran clearly are a dangerous country with big ambitions and coming out with the rhetoric to boot. Noises today are that the President stands by his claims. I don't believe Iraq ever posed a threat but I do believe Iran does. I'm not sure what you mean by backing them into a corner. If Iran continues to escalate in levels of threat then it needs to be pushed to discontinue its ambitions.

Are they really a dangerous country? Really? I think the reason for most of this rhetoric is the rhetoric thats preceded it from the "west." Iran are building a nuclear programme, which they claim is peaceful. The US, in particular, says otherwise. Given the record of the US in recent times on this kind of issue, I'd believe Iran before I'd believe the US. And while I'm totally opposed to ANY nuclear programme -peaceful or otherwise- what gives the US, or Britain or Israel the right to tell people they can't have a nuclear programme? They have nuclear programmes, os its one law for the big boys and another law for the rest.

That hardly makes it right. Hitler and countless questionable speakers of venomous rhetoric have aired the views of the multitudes over time. A responsible political elite should attempt to quell the flames of hatred, not fan them. The fact that this man, who leads the country, is the equivilent of a boorish unmannered pig who eats with his fingers and puts his feet on the table during dinner on the international stage is disturbing and shows potential for further erratic behaviour. Hitler stepped up with one level of audacity at a time until he had annexed Czechoslovakia and invaded Poland.

It doesn't make it right, of course not. I was merely stating fact. Not agreeing with it.

Oh you think so, do you?

What do you want me to say like?

Don't get too hung up on the term Palestine. It's a geographical term, not a nation. It's very name is testement to the Romans attempting to take away any connection of an ethnic group to the region's name. But clearly the Israelis have not wiped the regions set aside for the Arab Palestinian state off the map. Indeed they're even widthdrawing from them. However even if what you said was so black and whitely accurate as you put it then you're saying two wrongs make a right.

I'm not saying two wrongs make a right, I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of the Israelis and their allies. The bottom line as regards Palestine is that there still huge numbers of refugees who were kicked out of their homes by the Israeli state- thats pretty much equivalent to wiping something off the map in my eyes anyway. I wasn't attempting to justify the elimination of Israel- it shouldn't and won't happen, can I say it any more clearly?

I'm not laughing. It's an outright disgrace that one UN member says this about another. Now before you go on about the outright disgrace of Israel's atrocities, they don't change the disgracefulness of Iran's comments. I don't get your analogy at all. This is medeival state relations coming from Iran. Totally backward and out of context behaviour on the international stage. Western politicians are quite right to disgusted.

Its also an outright disgrace that several UN members invent fictitious intelligence about another country as a pretext for invading it. I'm not challenging the disgracefullness of the comments by the Iranian President at all, I'm just stating that in my eyes, the condemnations ring a little hollow given the sources they come from- you know, the pot calling the kettle black and all that.

[Poor Student]

Are they really a dangerous country? Really? I think the reason for most of this rhetoric is the rhetoric thats preceded it from the "west." Iran are building a nuclear programme, which they claim is peaceful. The US, in particular, says otherwise. Given the record of the US in recent times on this kind of issue, I'd believe Iran before I'd believe the US. And while I'm totally opposed to ANY nuclear programme -peaceful or otherwise- what gives the US, or Britain or Israel the right to tell people they can't have a nuclear programme? They have nuclear programmes, os its one law for the big boys and another law for the rest.

They are a dangerous country. They're assisting groups in Iraq aimed at destabilising the country. Whatever about the rights and wrongs of the war they are assisting groups impeding Iraq's road to democracy. They also weild influence over groups like Hezbollah in Southern Lebanon. They are a disruptive and dangerous influence in the Middle East. Their nuclear programme I suppose is linked to self defence but the Nazis cracking the A-Bomb would have helped their defence too, doesn't mean every effort should not have been made to halt their programme. I'm not fond of nuclear proliferation any more than you are, but if I have to face the reality these weapons exist I'd rather have them in the hands of the US and UK than Iran. If you and I have a gun for self defence (no I don't believe in this either), we're still justified in saying that the unstable man who could go postal down the street shouldn't have a gun.

It doesn't make it right, of course not. I was merely stating fact. Not agreeing with it.

Fair enough, I accept you don't support it, glad to hear.

What do you want me to say like?

I'd expect a bit more than what sounded like a begrudging admission.

I'm not saying two wrongs make a right, I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of the Israelis and their allies. The bottom line as regards Palestine is that there still huge numbers of refugees who were kicked out of their homes by the Israeli state- thats pretty much equivalent to wiping something off the map in my eyes anyway. I wasn't attempting to justify the elimination of Israel- it shouldn't and won't happen, can I say it any more clearly?

Well, wait a minute, when has an independent Palestinian state existed on the map? Israel can't wipe out what doesn't exist. Israel is even widthdrawing illegal settlements by force from areas to make up this theoretical Palestinian state. Israel is not committed to the wiping out of "Palestine", they're in fact making an effort to establish it. Iran is however calling for their destruction. The same thing Arab states and the people of "Palestine" attempted to do to Israel in 1948. Israel is not trying to destroy the Palestinian state but protect themselves. They've committed some bad acts in attempting to do so. On the other hand Arab states have been committed to their destruction and some elements of the PLO are still committed to this as indeed are Iran it seems despite it being not their particular business. I don't see the hyprocisy to be honest.

Its also an outright disgrace that several UN members invent fictitious intelligence about another country as a pretext for invading it. I'm not challenging the disgracefullness of the comments by the Iranian President at all, I'm just stating that in my eyes, the condemnations ring a little hollow given the sources they come from- you know, the pot calling the kettle black and all that.

I'm sorry Eanna but there's an imbalance here. To invent ficticious evidence to declare war on a tyrannical regime (don't agree with it myself) and to call for the destruction of a nation (which sounds rather genocidal, maniacal and sectarian given the Jewish nature of the state) are different things and Western nations should rightly speak out and take action if this aggression continues. After all too, not all Western states supported or got involved with the Iraq war anyway.

[CollegeTillIDie]

Just one point... Armageddon is a River valley in Syria........

[Thunderblaster]

Everybody knows that Iran is ruled by religious fundamentalists since 1979, and you have got to accept that freedom of speech or press is denied by a suppressive government. Iran has a poor record on human rights. Anyone that openly calls for the destruction of Israel deserves to be hauled into the United Nations Security Council and get their butts kicked. Jews lived in Israel for thousands of years and have every right to live there. Islam is only 1300 years old. If Dublin was attacked by suicide bombers and 150 people were killed, what would be your reaction? Not for one moment that I would expect Israel to take suicide bombings on the chin and pretend it never happened. Israel and the Palestinian Territories should be working for a peaceful solution and all terrorists lay down their arms. Remember, Israel has a multi-party democratic system, like ourselves and in principle, I have no problem with Israel and I know a couple of Israelis.

[Partizan]

Israel is the biggest threat in the Middle East. They've got nukes and hello people have used WMD's in the past (siege of Beirut in '82.)

They'ev managed to nearly wipe Palestine off the map and have broken every rule in the book with an abysmal human rights record and repeatedly ignored UN and international community to withdraw from Palestine. Also remember that the US/UK have nearly wiped Iraq off the map too and did a helluva lot of damage to Serbia too without paying any compensation.

I just sickens me to see the hypocrisy of Blair when his government sold weapons of 'mass destruction' to Israel which were used in Jenin in 2002.

SHUT UP BLAIR.

[Partizan]

Everybody knows that Iran is ruled by religious fundamentalists since 1979.

so is the US of A.

[HarpoJoyce]

Just another populist politician mouthing off.

Of course its in the interests of other populists to keep the debate going.

[Thunderblaster]

Didn't Iran use WMD in 2001. Firing live grenades at Shay Given's goal in Tehran.

[Bald Student]

Iran is all talk and no action as of yet.
Israel talks of democracy and freedom and whatever else your having but at the same time has nicked some of it's neighbours land.

[Macy]

Iran will be spun as a threat because of the trouble Bush and his administration is having at the moment. They need to deflect attention, what better than another war? Talk of Iran helping insurgents is all part of that spin imo. It's all coming from the same people that told us Iraq had WMD's afterall. I wouldn't trust any "intelligence" put out by the US or UK. Obviously Blair and Bertie will tow the party line.

[pete]

I don't see Iran as any threat. They know if they attack Israel that the US will counter attack plus the fact that Israel already has nukes & wouldn't hesitate to use them. Has not Bush said similar things about North Korea - threatened to attack them without provocation.

The US won't attack Iran openly either as doesn't have the numbers to fight another war. Iraq is becoming more like Vietnam every day.

Maybe the US is trying to create some public support for another war which is surprising as about 2/3 of US do not support Iraq invasion anymore.