What to do with Iran...

[Truronian]

He is a nut, and he has come out and said that all of that is his goal. To annhiliate Israel and America and to spread his extremist BS and all that blah blah blah. And there is no doubt in my mind that war with Iran would suck. But it would clear up Iraq in a hurry.

No, he hasn't, which is the real issue. He's been very careful to only threaten "Zionism" or "the ruling regime", and at no point has he threatened America. What he says is very calculated, and not the work of a nutter.

 

[GenMarshall]

As long as we are supplying weapons to both sides i think it is ok for us to set back and watch it unfold.

Unless we stop the cause of the insurgents in Iraq stealing our weapons. Then we would be only supplying Israel .

 

[A1CBOZ]

No, he hasn't, which is the real issue. He's been very careful to only threaten "Zionism" or "the ruling regime", and at no point has he threatened America. What he says is very calculated, and not the work of a nutter.

When he allows parades of people burning American flags chanting "Death to America" and effigys (sp?) of Uncle Sam, that pretty much states his intentions.

Your saying that becasue he is calculating means he isn't crazy? So Hitler wasn't crazy? or Stalin? or Mao?

 

[Rambuchan]

He is a nut, and he has come out and said that all of that is his goal. To annhiliate Israel and America and to spread his extremist BS and all that blah blah blah. And there is no doubt in my mind that war with Iran would suck. But it would clear up Iraq in a hurry.

Who will you invade to clear up the Iranian mess?

No, he hasn't, which is the real issue. He's been very careful to only threaten "Zionism" or "the ruling regime", and at no point has he threatened America. What he says is very calculated, and not the work of a nutter.

There has indeed been something of a loss in translation...

Translation of phrase "wiped off the map"

Many news sources have presented one of Ahmadinejad's phrases in Persian as a statement that "Israel must be wiped off the map"[4][5][6], an English idiom which means to "obliterate totally",[7] and "destroy completely", such as by powerful bombs,[8] or other catasrophes.[9]

Juan Cole, a University of Michigan Professor of Modern Middle East and South Asian History, translates the Persian phrase as:

The Imam said that this regime occupying Jerusalem (een rezhim-e eshghalgar-e qods) must [vanish from] the page of time (bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad).[10]

According to Cole, "Ahmadinejad did not say he was going to 'wipe Israel off the map' because no such idiom exists in Persian" and "He did say he hoped its regime, i.e., a Jewish-Zionist state occupying Jerusalem, would collapse."[11]

The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) translates the phrase similarly:

[T]his regime that is occupying Qods [Jerusalem] must be eliminated from the pages of history.[12]

Iran has repeatedly rejected the allegations that Ahmadinejad has stated 'Israel must be wiped off the map'. [13][14][15] On 20 February 2006, Iran’s foreign minister denied that Tehran wanted to see Israel “wiped off the map,” saying Ahmadinejad had been misunderstood. "Nobody can remove a country from the map. This is a misunderstanding in Europe of what our president mentioned," Manouchehr Mottaki told a news conference, speaking in English, after addressing the European Parliament. "How is it possible to remove a country from the map? He is talking about the regime. We do not recognise legally this regime," he said. [16][17][18]

In a June 11, 2006 analysis of the translation controversy, New York Times deputy foreign editor Ethan Bronner stated that Ahmadinejad had said that Israel was to be wiped off the map. After noting the objections of critics such as Cole and Steele, Bronner said: "But translators in Tehran who work for the president's office and the foreign ministry disagree with them. All official translations of Mr. Ahmadinejad's statement, including a description of it on his Web site (www.president.ir/eng/), refer to wiping Israel away." Bronner stated: "So did Iran's president call for Israel to be 'wiped off the map'? It certainly seems so. Did that amount to a call for war? That remains an open question."[11]

On June 15, 2006 The Guardian columnist and foreign correspondent Jonathan Steele cites several Persian speakers and translators who state that the phrase in question is more accurately translated as an "occupying regime" being "eliminated" or "wiped off" or "wiped away" from "the page of time" or "the pages of history", rather than "Israel" being "wiped off the map". [19]

A synopsis of Mr Ahmadinejad's speech on the Iranian Presidential website states:

He further expressed his firm belief that the new wave of confrontations generated in Palestine and the growing turmoil in the Islamic world would in no time wipe Israel away. [20]

The same idiom in his speech on December 13, 2006 was translated as "wipe out" by Reuters:

Just as the Soviet Union was wiped out and today does not exist, so will the Zionist regime soon be wiped out."[21]

Iran's state-owned Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting translated Ahmadinejad's comments as "Israel must be wiped off the map", [22] which is said to have been the origin for this translation controversy.[23]

wiki summary

 

[GenMarshall]

And what about the Iranians calling the US "The Great Satan"?

 

[Verbose]

He is a nut, and he has come out and said that all of that is his goal. To annhiliate Israel and America and to spread his extremist BS and all that blah blah blah. And there is no doubt in my mind that war with Iran would suck. But it would clear up Iraq in a hurry.

No he's not. He's a populist, and it's at our own peril if we misconstrue what's going on with Iran.

As others have pointed out, he only comes across as a nut when put through the trials of translation, particularily in reporting where the agenda favours casting the Iranian prez. as a dangerous nut.

Aside from this, he will be gone after the next Iranian presidential election.

 

[Ramius75]

And what about the Iranians calling the US "The Great Satan"?

Bush also called Iraq, Iran and north korea the axis of evil. + attacked one of them. go figure.

 

[AL_DA_GREAT]

The UN says that Iran can't have nukes. America is mearly trying to prop up the UN and make it do what it's supposed to do. And America was appointed world cop in 1991 when the USSR fell. It is the responsibility of the sole world superpower to ensure international laws are observed and to help smaller/weaker/poorer nations when needed.

did the rest of the world appoint you or did your greed do it.
BTW did Iran write the nuclear non(whatever the treaty was called) treaty. Your treaty that you designed for your intrests.

 

[Verbose]

When he allows parades of people burning American flags chanting "Death to America" and effigys (sp?) of Uncle Sam, that pretty much states his intentions.

That's a bit of officially organised street-theatre. The real Iranian government, the un-elected Mullahs of the Islamist revolution, have every interest of building the US up as a boogey-man with which to scare its own people. This external threat is an imoportant part of their power-gambit for Iranian internal politics.

The fact the the US is very obliging in returning the name-calling, talking about the need to at least bomb Iran etc., plays into their hands. The more credible a threat the US presents itself as, the better it fulfills its role in Iranian politics as assigned by the Mullahs. Should the US actually attack, it will be to the great detriment to Iranian society as a whoile of course, but it would ensure the continued religious hold on politics. Basically the Mullahs of Iran are banking on the US not being so stupid it actually goes to war, but apparently the US is stupid enough to go on playing a credible external threat to Iran.

This is of course precisely why the US should probably do nothing at this point. Iran will go nuclear regardless if this is done as an Islamist Republic, or as a secular Republic. The young population of Iran is mostly hostile towards their own political leadership and the most pro-western, pro-US people in the Middle East, aside from Israel. Odds are very good they will eventually sort themselves out of their own accord. Meddling by the US, or anyone else, is very likely to just hurt things here. Tough titty, if this realisation in unpalatable to those who implicitly want to take a pro-active stance about Iran. It's just hard to find one for the US, which isn't likley to hurt US interests more.

Compared to Pakistan, Iran at present is worrying, but with a considerable chance of going in the right direction. The opposite it true about Pakistan; OK for the moment, but all the likely future scenarios look bad.

Your saying that becasue he is calculating means he isn't crazy? So Hitler wasn't crazy? or Stalin? or Mao?

Sorry, but that's a Mickey Mouse-view of international politics.

 

[El Koeno]

And what about the Iranians calling the US "The Great Satan"?

I think many Americans thought of the Soviet Union in similar terms. I think you'd be hard pressed to find Americans that think that such thoughts would have been sufficient ground for a Soviet attack on the US...

 

[FriendlyFire]

Theres plenty of options best would be a mix of softpower, diplomacy, economic sanctions, economic insentives, poltical isolation, poltical accomidation surffice.

The international community should be able to control the supply of uranium. i.e simply refine the heavy uranium and sell the rest a fuel while keeping the weapon grade stuff under tight control.

 

[Truronian]

Your saying that becasue he is calculating means he isn't crazy? So Hitler wasn't crazy? or Stalin? or Mao?

No, they were not. If you want a crazy leader, try King George III.

 

[Truronian]

And what about the Iranians calling the US "The Great Satan"?

What about the ones that have nothing against America?

 

[aronnax]

I actaully dont know why some people get so worked up over a nuclear bomb, having one is worse than not having one. Iran may build a nuclear bomb, but do you think it will use it at the expense of a total trade sanctions, aggression from other countries and disapproval from neighbours? Even if they use one, America has plently stockpile to fire back. Someone told me "The day Israel get wipe off the map is the day before Iran gets wipe of the map". I think we should just sit back relax and hopefully there shall be a revoultion instead.

 

[amadeus]

What about the ones that have nothing against America?

They aren't in their "government."

 

[Fugitive Sisyphus]

The way I see it, we can ignore them, destroy them, or culture flip them. The last is probably the best solution as we are suffering from war weariness as it is.

 

[Truronian]

They aren't in their "government."

You know their government intimately?

 

[amadeus]

You know their government intimately?

Khameini is anti-U.S., Ahmadinejad is anti-U.S.

That's about all you need to know.

 

[Rambuchan]

Khameini is anti-U.S., Ahmadinejad is anti-U.S.

That's about all you need to know.

Yeah, because knowing why they are so, and what past events have led them to be so, would be too much uncomfortable information. It would also be an unacceptable misfit with the far easier 'they're anti-US, religious nut cases' stereotype.

 

[dh_epic]

I would keep airstrikes on the table. I think that's a strong enough threat. An invasion would just be disastrous.

There's a LOT of Iranians who want to continue the periods of reform that occur between periods of hardcore fundamentalism. We'd be smart to exploit that. Information warfare, and espionage. Combine that with basic, basic diplomacy -- just talking. I'm confident we could accomplish a lot. I believe that being too closed-minded with Iran would convince a lot of Iranians we have no hope for them, and that would ultimately just sew the seeds of more radicalism.

I think the best way to fight radicalism in Iran is to get MTV in there. Get McDonald's in there. Give them an apple store. We have it pretty good here in the west. They'll never see that, though, if all they see is our bombs and our spite for all things middle eastern... and our high divorce rates, obesity, and rampant mindless celebrity worship.