Iran: Israel should be wiped off map

Quote:

---

Iran: Israel should be wiped off map



President Ahmadinejad: Establishment of Israel offensive move; Islamic nation will not let its historic enemy live in its midst
Ynet and agencies




The State of Israel should be wiped off the map, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Wednesday, underscoring Teheran’s extreme attitude towards the Jewish State.



The Iranian leader's remarks were made during a convention entitled "A World Without Zionists."


“The establishment of the State of Israel was an offensive move. The Islamic nation will not let its historic enemy live in its midst,” he said.

---

Lets hope they get nukes as soon as possible.

LINK

seeing as how Israel has nukes*, and will use them as their version of the Final Solution against all Arab countries should Israel be in risk of losing a war of existence, let's hope it's just political rhetoric and nothing more from Iran.

*they acquired nukes via spies in the US - so much for our "allies".

I wonder how an American poll would have turned out about nuking Canada.

If Israel was losing a war and was on the threat of being destroyed, I honestly do think that the United States would intervene and prevent it from happening.

I especially liked this comment from the Iran President

Quote:

---

“The establishment of the State of Israel was an offensive move. The Islamic nation will not let its historic enemy live in its midst,” he said.

---

Now that seems to be about one of the most idiotic comments I have heard from a national leader.'

Israel as a nation last existed when Islam was not even a religion, or at least that is the history I have read - being that Islam was founded sometime after the foundation of the Christian Religion and Israel was not a nation during that time period. . ~:eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Redleg

I especially liked this comment from the Iran President



Now that seems to be about one of the most idiotic comments I have heard from a national leader.'

Israel as a nation last existed when Islam was not even a religion, or at least that is the history I have read - being that Islam was founded sometime after the foundation of the Christian Religion and Israel was not a nation during that time period. . ~:eek:

---

I think he means its offical establishment as a country in the late 1940's, which still is incorrect, though. It was an offensive move... the UN pretty much cut the country in half. The arabs followed up by an invasion. If anything, it was defensive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghost908

If Israel was losing a war and was on the threat of being destroyed, I honestly do think that the United States would intervene and prevent it from happening.

---

That reminds me of general conspiracy theories around..

Whatever the reason would be, you're right with it..

Middle East - where the human life started and where it will end, one friend had said..

Defensive expansionism? ~:confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Redleg

“The establishment of the State of Israel was an offensive move.", he said.

Now that seems to be about one of the most idiotic comments

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Redleg

Israel as a nation last existed when Islam was not even a religion

---

How ironic. ~;p

Now that seems to be about one of the most idiotic comments I have heard from a national leader.'

“The establishment of the State of Israel was an offensive move.
Isn't that exactly the same comment that was made by just about all of the leaders in the region at the time ?
What is idiotic is that he is still saying it nearly 60 years later .
The Islamic nation will not let its historic enemy live in its midst,”
Though of course that part is clearly rubbish and has no relation to facts .

Iran wants Israel, they'll need to go through Iraq first. We *already* have men on both sides of their nation, we'd have to mobilize a few hundred thousand more, but they want Israel, Iran will have to be a glowing green radioactive rock before Israel dissappears, I think. Not that I want it to be, I kinda like Iran, it's big, but Israel does have enough nukes to wipe the middle east off of the face of the earth, and if Iran starts somthing, well, I feel bad for dirush (SP).

Iran wants Israel, they'll need to go through Iraq first. We *already* have men on both sides of their nation
Ah .....I see the cunning plan now , by getting America to install an Iranian dominated government in Iraq they are using it as a stepping stone to get closer to Israel while tying down their major opponent in an unending and seemingly unwinnable conflict , at the same time they have secured their rear by removing the threat of the Taliban .
Meanwhile their proxy forces are securing territory both north and south of Israel with "help" from the rest of the world .
Clever buggers them evil mullahs arn't they .
But I suppose you can always rely on your allies in the region , there is that nice dictator to the East , but unfortunately he is having a little problem himself in Baluchistan , not really the best place to mass for an offensive is it , being on the verge of civil war already . The Saudis , yeah they are sure to rush to your aid . Egypt , how much are you paying them not to fight already . Turkey , not bloody likely .

Unfortunately the lunatics are well and truly in charge of the asylum , the asylum is expanding , and the doctors who could be keeping the lunatics in order are now stuck in a straight-jacket that the lunatics made for them .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Iran wants Israel, they'll need to go through Iraq first. We *already* have men on both sides of their nation
Ah .....I see the cunning plan now , by getting America to install an Iranian dominated government in Iraq they are using it as a stepping stone to get closer to Israel while tying down their major opponent in an unending and seemingly unwinnable conflict , at the same time they have secured their rear by removing the threat of the Taliban .
Meanwhile their proxy forces are securing territory both north and south of Israel with "help" from the rest of the world .
Clever buggers them evil mullahs arn't they .
But I suppose you can always rely on your allies in the region , there is that nice dictator to the East , but unfortunately he is having a little problem himself in Baluchistan , not really the best place to mass for an offensive is it , being on the verge of civil war already . The Saudis , yeah they are sure to rush to your aid . Egypt , how much are you paying them not to fight already . Turkey , not bloody likely .

Unfortunately the lunatics are well and truly in charge of the asylum , the asylum is expanding , and the doctors who could be keeping the lunatics in order are now stuck in a straight-jacket that the lunatics made for them .

---

Didn't you ever see the Bush strategy?

TIC TAC TOE!

https://img440.imageshack.us/img440/...trategy5ft.png

Israel has to consider a first strike on Iran's nuclear program. It worked in Iraq. This time they might have to use "heavier" stuff to pull it off.

Could be he´s playing the "I´m a looney"-game. Only, he´s starting early.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A.Saturnus

Could be he´s playing the "I´m a looney"-game.

---

http://ttkd.homepage.t-online.de/gumb8.jpg

It is just the same old rhetoric. ~:rolleyes:

Ayatollah Khamenei inherited the same stance from the late Ayatollah Khomeini (May God forgive his many sins). When President Ahmadinejad is saying such things, it is certainly with the blessing of Khamenei. Either that or he has gone crazy.

It is unusual for a high-ranking official to say such things publicly, so he is either A) Being defiant in the face of the world, B) pandering to his followers, or C) both.

The United States will not let Israel be destroyed. Of course it will never come down to that as the "President" of Iran is just playing to the comman arab hatred of Jews that resonates in many parts of his country.

If you’re looking for Arabs in Iran, I’ll advice you to look in Khuzestan.

I meant arab in the political sense, ie the Pan-Arab movement.

To be more specific, the President of Iran was playing on the anti-semetic hate that is common among muslims in the Middle East.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Red Harvest

Israel has to consider a first strike on Iran's nuclear program. It worked in Iraq. This time they might have to use "heavier" stuff to pull it off.

---

Let's hope so. That's probably the best course of action left to contain Iran's expanding influence in the region, thanks to...

But it's going to be very hard, and will cause human right groups a bit of anger with the death of the scientists necessary for the bombing to actually have a long-term effect (the facilities alone could be rebuilt). Let's hope it's not going to end like Carter's. Besides, Israel rarely hesitates historically when its safety is threatened to take a bold action, unlike the Police of the World.

The president is a lunatic, chosen among more than a thousand candidates of lunatics, moderates, and reformers. Great choice from the Supreme Leader there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghost908

If Israel was losing a war and was on the threat of being destroyed, I honestly do think that the United States would intervene and prevent it from happening.

---

As liberal as I am, I have to agree.

The Iranian president surely knows how to make friends... :huh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bmolsson

The Iranian president surely knows how to make friends... :huh:

---

Hey, what's a man supposed to do? He's surrounded by heavily armed Americans and suspected of trying to build nuclear weapons. It's time for some posturing in order to bolster confidence at home. Anti-Israel posturing also buys support from people outside Iran. ~:rolleyes:

Invade!

It's all about the nuclear stuff methinks. Generally when people talk big, they are going to act small, and visa versa. In this case it is very big talk.

I also wonder if this has a lot to do with Hizbollah in Lebanon and it's political marginalisation after the withdrawl of Syria.

There are lots of ins and out here - and I wonder if the comment, strangely enough, has pretty much nothing to do with Israel.

I also wonder if this has a lot to do with Hizbollah in Lebanon and it's political marginalisation after the withdrawl of Syria.

Its group got 54 of the 128 seats , hardly marginalised is it . Though of course the constitution means that it would never get to have the Presidency even if it won all 128 seats .
But then again everything is linked in the mid-east .

Its all LLoyed georges fault,

WW1 and all that.
Failure to redistribute the land and what have you.

So seeing as it was a welsh guy who started this mess.
I think i should have a say.
And i say :)

leave them alone let them do what they want on there island.

Here in the uk We had YEARS of this stuff,
Many battles and wars, (could be a good TW game)
America Had a few little battles. "i think thats why the keep startiong wars" (making up lost ground)

And these Almost 3rd world countrys, Really should be allowed to have there little war And decide Who owns what in the good old fashioned way,

By that i mean,
Legions of foot soldiers and cavalry. And a smattering of archers and a few charriots for good mesure, I guess if you have them you could use tigers and eliphants if you wanted.
With the country's Prime minister/President Leading the charge.

Obviously Its not going to happen like that,
And some idiots In germany decided to build a nucular bomb.
which americans then Decided to do as well. (and finished 1st)
Followed by russia.
Then a whole HOST of other countrys.

And now theres this big old mess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by solypsist

seeing as how Israel has nukes*, and will use them as their version of the Final Solution against all Arab countries should Israel be in risk of losing a war of existence, let's hope it's just political rhetoric and nothing more from Iran.

*they acquired nukes via spies in the US - so much for our "allies".

---

So did the Russians, again, while they were our allies.

I really can't think of an alliance -- aside from Britain/UK -- that has not had more "convenience" than "connection" to it.

Aside from the vagaries of political alliance, was your phrasing purposefully designed to offend any Israeli reading it or a mis-guided attempt at humor? The phrase "their version of the Final Solution" is more than a little rude.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Aside from the vagaries of political alliance, was your phrasing purposefully designed to offend any Israeli reading it or a mis-guided attempt at humor? The phrase "their version of the Final Solution" is more than a little rude.

---

It is rude but quite true. Having nuclear weapons ready to wipe out all the large cities of hostile nations in the event of Israel's total defeat is most certainly a kind of "Final Solution".

Iran requires subtle diplomacy, not this administrations strong suit.

Nuclear weapons represent more that their awesome destructive power. They are a symbol of international strength and status. Many people in Iran who are anti-clerical might still support this issue out of national pride, (I'm guessing here), but i'm pretty sure any military operation against their facilities would unify the entire nation behind the Mullahs and their hard line policies.

What to do? Israel, Pakistan, and India all have the bomb. Do you really think the Iranian clerics would launch an aggressive war with nuclear weapons against Israel? I don't. I think the MAD doctrine would give them pause. The real threat is from terrorists and the access they might have to Nucs.

But which would be a greater terrorist threat, a cleric led Iran with responsibility for it's own nuclear weapons and a substantial portion of it's population pushing for reform or a totally enraged Iran with a smoking nuclear complex and unified populace?