Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > 1939 Redux

1939 Redux
Thread Tools
Hawkeye_a
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2009, 10:12 AM
 
The situations(global) is starting to look awful familiar, don't you think ?

A 'tyrannical' regime, in a 'pseudo' democratic nation, with a leader who wasn't really 'by the people', threatening the Jewish nation(people) cause he sees a way to polarize and focus energies and hatred of his 'nation' to appease their envy and inferiority complexes.

While the rest of the world looks the other way or tries to appease him...... despite his constant and unjustified threats to destroy a nation.

Honestly, after they found(yeah someone broke the news before they 'admitted it') the second reactor and then the long range missile tests yesterday.. i am in awe at the fact that absolutely NO ACTION or firm DECISION has been taken.

The line has been crossed in my opinion, and diplomacy and the U.N. has failed. All they are good for is twiddling their thumbs and wasting precious time.

Discuss.
( Last edited by Hawkeye_a; Sep 29, 2009 at 10:25 AM. )
     
mattyb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Standing on the shoulders of giants
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2009, 10:18 AM
 
Don't worry, in a few days something in Iran will blow up.

And the Israelis will deny having anything to do with it.
     
Dork.
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2009, 10:27 AM
 
I doubt that. The Israelis won't deny a thing.
     
SpaceMonkey
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2009, 12:34 PM
 
Getting more than 2 countries to agree to do something in unison usually takes more than a couple of days.

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
Warren Pease
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2009, 12:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
A 'tyrannical' regime, in a 'pseudo' democratic nation, with a leader who wasn't really 'by the people', threatening the Jewish nation(people) cause he sees a way to polarize and focus energies and hatred of his 'nation' to appease their envy and inferiority complexes.
By quoting the words that you did, you are diminishing your argument.

What was the new threat? (Honestly, I haven't seen coverage of the latest meeting.)

Is the US's standing all-options-on-the-table response (read: nuclear) itself a threat?

[Added: Why is everything compared to Hitler's Germany? Can't situations (and solutions) be based on what they are, rather than some forced analogy?]
( Last edited by Warren Pease; Sep 29, 2009 at 01:09 PM. )
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2009, 12:52 PM
 
Yes, this is exactly like 1939.
     
Dork.
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2009, 02:22 PM
 
Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey View Post
Getting more than 2 countries to agree to do something in unison usually takes more than a couple of days.
Which is why when the Israelis bomb Iran, they'll be doing it on their own.
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2009, 02:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dork. View Post
I doubt that. The Israelis won't deny a thing.
True. Israel wants people to know who just smacked them around so everyone will think twice before starting something. It's the Palestinians who are always like, "Who, me? Nah, must have been that other terrorist organization down the street. Let's make peace."
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Atheist
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Back in the Good Ole US of A
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2009, 03:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Yes, this is exactly like 1939.
I can't wait till Iran invades Poland!
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2009, 03:39 PM
 
Don't forget the Falkland Islands... for... strategic sheep purposes.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 30, 2009, 09:55 AM
 
"In every generation, they arise against us to destroy us."

And Persia is the leader of the last rebellion. it's all been foretold.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Hawkeye_a  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 30, 2009, 01:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by Warren Pease View Post
By quoting the words that you did, you are diminishing your argument.

What was the new threat? (Honestly, I haven't seen coverage of the latest meeting.)

Is the US's standing all-options-on-the-table response (read: nuclear) itself a threat?

[Added: Why is everything compared to Hitler's Germany? Can't situations (and solutions) be based on what they are, rather than some forced analogy?]
Well i couldn't think of a better way to illustrate my 'air quotes' ....

New threat..... proven deception, continuing rhetoric towards Israel. Strangely enough, if Iran wasn't picking a fight with Israel(i mean the dont share borders so i wonder what Iran's beef is....oh wait, yeah i forgot it's about religion), the world wouldn't be so concerned about them right now.

Imo, the Obama admin isnt taking as tough a stand as necessary.....i sortof wish Bush was at the helm right now. The Europeans cannot present a united front, and are too docile. The Russians and Chinese have to obviously protect their investments.... how far they will go to do so, is probably a major consideration.

Hitler and Germany.... im not comparing everything.... just this one specific thing... here you have a nutjob denying the Holocaust, and then claiming that the Jewish State is 'illegal' and 'unjustified', etc, calling for the essential elimination of a sovereign state when all accounts of history show us that they(Israel) did nothing that would be considered illegal(and in fact compromised above and beyond what any other nation would have done). Hitler did the same, blaming Germany's problems on European Jewry, denying the persecution they endured while in europe, and in a similar was, vowing to eliminate Jews in all Europe(ie the Jewish nation).

But the similarities i'd like to highlight are not the ones mentioned above, but rather the way the world by large has responded to the escalation of rhetoric and accumulation of power and arms by Iran......Before WWII they sat idly by for years until things went so wrong, after WWII they lit flames around the world with engravings 'lest we forget', and now they're making the exact same mistake as before !
( Last edited by Hawkeye_a; Sep 30, 2009 at 01:53 PM. )
     
Arty50
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2000
Location: I've moved so many times; I forgot.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 30, 2009, 06:02 PM
 
Yeah, this is totally like 1939. Cause Iran has this massive army that will take over the entire middle east and then the world. Oh and they've aligned themselves with and axis of...uhhhhh...crickets chirping.

People, get a grip.

Let the UN do it's job. This isn't WMDs in Iraq. The circumstances are totally different. Sanctions could actually have a huge impact here. Yesterday on the radio I heard that one of the sanctions being thrown around would be to basically ban any insurer who provided insurance to shipments to Iran. They're reliant on a lot of imported goods, namely over 40% of their gasoline requirements are filled by imports despite the fact they're a major oil exporter. They don't have the refinery capacity to meet their own demand for the end product. That's not something you just build overnight.

Also, claiming that having Bush at the helm would have been better is insane. The moron would have invaded Iran in an instant and gotten us into a war that we absolutely positively couldn't win. We're already stretched thin enough between Iraq and Afghanistan. Have you seen the size of Iran? Not to mention the fact that Obama actually has a dialogue with Russia right now and they've hinted that they might support sanctions in the future. Bush's relationship with Russia was adversarial at best. No way he could have gotten even a hint of support out of them. Really though, who's at the helm doesn't matter now does it. It's a side argument that has little bearing on the right here and now.
"My friend, there are two kinds of people in this world:
those with loaded guns, and those who dig. You dig."

-Clint in "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly"
     
TheWOAT
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 30, 2009, 06:07 PM
 
They are releasing "The Wizard of Oz", its 1939 all over again. How about them Yankees? Lou Gherig is something else.
.......
     
SpaceMonkey
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 30, 2009, 07:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by TheWOAT View Post
They are releasing "The Wizard of Oz", its 1939 all over again. How about them Yankees? Lou Gherig is something else.
If it's truly September 30, 1939, then Lou has already retired.

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
Hawkeye_a  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 1, 2009, 02:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by Arty50 View Post
Let the UN do it's job.
I was only pointing out the strange(almost erie) similarities of the two situations.

Regarding your statement.... there are so many cooks making that broth and here we are expecting it to turn out alright. When has it turned out alright ? All they do is talk, and only when the **** hits the fans, do they ever make any concrete decision. the last one i can remember was AFTER the balkans fiasco, and the one before that was AFTER Iraq invaded Kuwait. notice a problem there ? 'AFTER'.... when dealing with nukes ?

The U.N. has become a janitor to clean up the mess instead of actually doing stuff to prevent the mess in the first place, imo.

Iraq was a bad decision...strategically(Yes that was Bush's fault). Even if they did have WMDs...why a full scale invasion ? too expensive...just go in, destroy the weapons and leave.(Too bad the desire and capabilities to build nukes was just across the border.) Like the Israelis did in 1967 to the Arab airforces, and the nuclear reactors in Iraq and Syria.

Actually....strange parallels to to Yom Kippur War, as the U.S. was busy in Vietnam, and only aided Israel with an airlift against the Arabs&Soviets. Now, the U.S. is busy in Afghanistan and Iraq.... i assume(hope) the missile defense will contain Iran if there is an "intervention".
( Last edited by Hawkeye_a; Oct 1, 2009 at 07:25 AM. )
     
mattyb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Standing on the shoulders of giants
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 1, 2009, 06:58 AM
 
Originally Posted by Arty50 View Post
Let the UN do it's job.
Now THAT'S funny !!! Excellent !!
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 1, 2009, 08:35 AM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
"In every generation, they arise against us to destroy us."

And Persia is the leader of the last rebellion. it's all been foretold.
Where does it say this? I'd like to read that.

greg
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
nonhuman
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Baltimore, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 1, 2009, 08:46 AM
 
Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton View Post
Where does it say this? I'd like to read that.

greg
It's in the Pesach (Passover) Haggadah: Maggid - English Haggadah with Instructional Guide - Passover.

(The in every generation part. Dunno about the Persia part.)
     
nonhuman
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Baltimore, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 1, 2009, 08:51 AM
 
Originally Posted by Arty50 View Post
Let the UN do it's job. This isn't WMDs in Iraq. The circumstances are totally different. Sanctions could actually have a huge impact here. Yesterday on the radio I heard that one of the sanctions being thrown around would be to basically ban any insurer who provided insurance to shipments to Iran. They're reliant on a lot of imported goods, namely over 40% of their gasoline requirements are filled by imports despite the fact they're a major oil exporter. They don't have the refinery capacity to meet their own demand for the end product. That's not something you just build overnight.
I'm not convinced that sanctions ever actually work. They just make the people of the country desperate while simultaneously providing an evil foreign oppressor for the local dictator to scapegoat. Sanctions make it look like we are the ones responsible for the plight of the Iranian people, not their own government. We need a way to make it clear that their own government, system of government even, is the problem. Of course we're responsible for their system of government, so even then we're still kinda screwed...
     
Taliesin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 2, 2009, 04:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
I was only pointing out the strange(almost erie) similarities of the two situations.
Ahmadinejad called the holocaust a myth that is being instrumentalised by zionists to justify Israel's existence and oppression of the palestinians.

I don't think that Hitler called the holocaust a myth, in fact he was fully aware and the one ordering the holocaust.

As to Israel's legitimacy and legality or lack of: The zionists back then founded a state in an area they came to as immigrants claiming that the memory of ancient Israel makes it theirs and used the turmoil created because of this to forcefully expell palestinians and to steal their land and homes, and using wars to expand its territory further stealing land and driving out palestinians and using occupied land to create colonies, etc... I would call a lot of that illegal.

Hitler believed in the race-theory developed by american scientists at the beginning of the 20th century, wherein the aryan race was declared as the best race and blacks, jews.. as of the worst. Hitler wanted to purify the german, aryan race by getting rid of other races with which they could intermingle, and in Germany it happened to be the jews that were the predominant minority. On top of that he feared the jews' financial might, which by the way was feared and respected back then by americans and britains, too.

So in Hitler's mind two threats combined, the racial intermingling of the supposedly noble germans with a supposedly inferior race, the jews, and the belief that jews controlled the banking-system causing the economic crisis in Germany and supposedly punishing Germany.

Therefore Hitler sought the physical destruction of all jews that were in his reach.

Ahmadinejad wants to see the end of Israel as a jewish state, the return of the palestinian refuggees and the establishment of a palestinian state from sea to river. Ahmadinejad sees the jewish Israel as an occupation of islamic land and as a colony of the western world, ie. as an instrument to control the oil-rich middle-east, as a thorn in the side of the islamic world, and would like to get rid of it, but with jews as individuals he seems to have no problem.

In fact most arabs think similarly about it, and so Ahmadinejad merely taps into this general feeling using it to gain moral leadership even among the sunnis, the socalled arab street, as he tries to undermine the leaders of the sunni-arabs who mostly are pro-US-regimes.

Taliesin
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 2, 2009, 04:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by Taliesin View Post
Ahmadinejad called the holocaust a myth that is being instrumentalised by zionists to justify Israel's existence and oppression of the palestinians.

.......

Ahmadinejad wants to see the end of Israel as a jewish state, the return of the palestinian refuggees and the establishment of a palestinian state from sea to river. Ahmadinejad sees the jewish Israel as an occupation of islamic land and as a colony of the western world, ie. as an instrument to control the oil-rich middle-east, as a thorn in the side of the islamic world, and would like to get rid of it, but with jews as individuals he seems to have no problem.

In fact most arabs think similarly about it, and so Ahmadinejad merely taps into this general feeling using it to gain moral leadership even among the sunnis, the socalled arab street, as he tries to undermine the leaders of the sunni-arabs who mostly are pro-US-regimes.
The problem with Ahmadinejad is that while everything you just said above is TRUE, he completely undermines himself by the portion in bold. Not only is that foolishness demonstrably false, it makes it way too easy for the West to divert attention away from the fundamental issue and focus on the Holocaust denial angle.

OAW
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 2, 2009, 05:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Yes, this is exactly like 1939.
Just with more Apple rumors.
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 2, 2009, 05:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Just with more Apple rumors.
I'm sure I remember Sept 1939, Germany invades Poland, Apple Tablet in time for Christmas.

Those were the days.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 2, 2009, 07:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by mattyb View Post
Originally Posted by Arty50 View Post
Let the UN do it's job.
Now THAT'S funny !!! Excellent !!
I take the misuse of apostrophes very seriously.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
King Bob On The Cob
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Illinois
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 2, 2009, 07:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by Taliesin View Post
As to Israel's legitimacy and legality or lack of: The zionists back then founded a state in an area they came to as immigrants claiming that the memory of ancient Israel makes it theirs and used the turmoil created because of this to forcefully expell palestinians and to steal their land and homes, and using wars to expand its territory further stealing land and driving out palestinians and using occupied land to create colonies, etc... I would call a lot of that illegal.

Taliesin
*sigh* Because there was only one side at fault with that whole mess. If you want to blame someone, blame the British.
     
Captain Obvious
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Chicago
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 2, 2009, 08:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by Arty50 View Post
Let the UN do it's job.
That is the funniest f'ing thing I have ever heard.
Classic!

Barack Obama: Four more years of the Carter Presidency
     
Hawkeye_a  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2009, 07:49 AM
 
Originally Posted by Taliesin View Post
Ahmadinejad called the holocaust a myth that is being instrumentalised by zionists to justify Israel's existence and oppression of the palestinians.

I don't think that Hitler called the holocaust a myth, in fact he was fully aware and the one ordering the holocaust.

As to Israel's legitimacy and legality or lack of: The zionists back then founded a state in an area they came to as immigrants claiming that the memory of ancient Israel makes it theirs and used the turmoil created because of this to forcefully expell palestinians and to steal their land and homes, and using wars to expand its territory further stealing land and driving out palestinians and using occupied land to create colonies, etc... I would call a lot of that illegal.

Hitler believed in the race-theory developed by american scientists at the beginning of the 20th century, wherein the aryan race was declared as the best race and blacks, jews.. as of the worst. Hitler wanted to purify the german, aryan race by getting rid of other races with which they could intermingle, and in Germany it happened to be the jews that were the predominant minority. On top of that he feared the jews' financial might, which by the way was feared and respected back then by americans and britains, too.

So in Hitler's mind two threats combined, the racial intermingling of the supposedly noble germans with a supposedly inferior race, the jews, and the belief that jews controlled the banking-system causing the economic crisis in Germany and supposedly punishing Germany.

Therefore Hitler sought the physical destruction of all jews that were in his reach.

Ahmadinejad wants to see the end of Israel as a jewish state, the return of the palestinian refuggees and the establishment of a palestinian state from sea to river. Ahmadinejad sees the jewish Israel as an occupation of islamic land and as a colony of the western world, ie. as an instrument to control the oil-rich middle-east, as a thorn in the side of the islamic world, and would like to get rid of it, but with jews as individuals he seems to have no problem.

In fact most arabs think similarly about it, and so Ahmadinejad merely taps into this general feeling using it to gain moral leadership even among the sunnis, the socalled arab street, as he tries to undermine the leaders of the sunni-arabs who mostly are pro-US-regimes.

Taliesin
I'm not going to get into a debate with you regarding the legality of Israel, as that matter has been settled by most of Israel's neighbors and the world by large. The ones sharing the longest borders with Israel have in fact made peace with Israel, something Israel wanted from day 1, but which land-hungry arab leaders decided it was better left upto war and a land-rush when the Brits left.

Refugees ? huh...give me a break. the day Israel should even consider opening their borders to the Arabs who left their land for the 'protection' of other muslim nations when they launched their numerous wars, should be the day when all the Jews and their descendants are reimbursed in full for being expelled from all muslim nations the day after Israel was born. That includes affording them equal rights and opportunities that Israel confers upon all it's citizens.... Jews, Christians, Muslim, etc alike. But as history(and current times) has shown the world, we all know what the fate of indigenous(and non) non-muslims are in the muslim world.

Hitler believed in "race theory", Ahmadinejad believes in "creed theory"(like MOST muslims). His only problem(a problem with any muslim imo) is that israel's land is not controlled by Muslims, but i guess that's a lot different(sarcasm) from what some Muslims keep jabbering on about how the world needs to be controlled by Muslims.... right ?

Ahmadinejad's denial of the holocaust is akin to Hitler's denial of the hardships that the Jews had to endure in Europe...inquisitions, etc. denying/disregarding that history, and making up some crazy stories about how they did in fact become successful, leads the lower ignorant groups to vilify them feeding their envy and jealousy of said group, which distracts them from what the real domestic problems are. Thats the similarity imo.

If the only problem Iranians and Arabs have with Israel is the fact that it is not 'owned' by Muslims.... they can go stuff it for all i care. Racist(Creedists) can be consumed with hate, envy and jealousy for all eternity for all i care. Cause imo, there's no return for appeasing that sort of mentality.
( Last edited by Hawkeye_a; Oct 3, 2009 at 08:48 AM. )
     
Taliesin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 4, 2009, 08:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
I'm not going to get into a debate with you regarding the legality of Israel, as that matter has been settled by most of Israel's neighbors and the world by large. The ones sharing the longest borders with Israel have in fact made peace with Israel, something Israel wanted from day 1, but which land-hungry arab leaders decided it was better left upto war and a land-rush when the Brits left.
Making peace with someone is not the same as admitting that the other has acted legally.
Fortunately, the historical archives of Israel and other countries were opened to historians during the 80's of last century and we know now pretty well what went on and why. The leaders of the zionists back then not only knew that war was inevitable when they founded Israel, they hoped for it, since they were not content with the small stretch of land that they legally possessed (7% of Israel was legally bought) + the land that the UN-partition-plan gave them as a present, not only were they aware that it was too small for them to create a viable state on, they espescially were discontent with the 45% palestinians that were to be within their borders creating a demographic threat for the future.

So they hoped for war and planned to use it to expand the territory and to expell the palestinians within their wished territory. To that end they made a secret deal with Jordan's king to use the war to divide the palestinian land between them, with Israel getting all the territory up to and including West-Jerusalem and Jordan getting the territory up to and including East-Jerusalem.


Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
Refugees ? huh...give me a break. the day Israel should even consider opening their borders to the Arabs who left their land for the 'protection' of other muslim nations when they launched their numerous wars, should be the day when all the Jews and their descendants are reimbursed in full for being expelled from all muslim nations the day after Israel was born. That includes affording them equal rights and opportunities that Israel confers upon all it's citizens.... Jews, Christians, Muslim, etc alike. But as history(and current times) has shown the world, we all know what the fate of indigenous(and non) non-muslims are in the muslim world.
I agree and exactly this should happen, but even if the islamic world wisened up to give muslims and non-muslims same rights and freedoms, Israel would never allow the return of the palestinian refugees into proper Israel.

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
Hitler believed in "race theory", Ahmadinejad believes in "creed theory"(like MOST muslims). His only problem(a problem with any muslim imo) is that israel's land is not controlled by Muslims, but i guess that's a lot different(sarcasm) from what some Muslims keep jabbering on about how the world needs to be controlled by Muslims.... right ?

Ahmadinejad's denial of the holocaust is akin to Hitler's denial of the hardships that the Jews had to endure in Europe...inquisitions, etc. denying/disregarding that history, and making up some crazy stories about how they did in fact become successful, leads the lower ignorant groups to vilify them feeding their envy and jealousy of said group, which distracts them from what the real domestic problems are. Thats the similarity imo.
Indeed there is a similarity, they both believed in the jewish conspiracy, ie. that jews control media and using and fabricating history to serve their interests, for example they both took "The protocols of the elder zions" as true, but back then most of europe and america believed similarly. But beyond that there is no similarity, Ahmadijenad has no racistic theory and does not seek the physical destruction of jews.

In fact Ahmadinejad and his family were practicing jews themselfs until he was four years old: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad revealed to have Jewish past - Telegraph

Taliesin
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 4, 2009, 10:19 AM
 
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
Iraq was a bad decision...strategically (Yes that was Bush's fault). Even if they did have WMDs...why a full scale invasion ? too expensive...just go in, destroy the weapons and leave. (Too bad the desire and capabilities to build nukes was just across the border.) Like the Israelis did in 1967 to the Arab airforces, and the nuclear reactors in Iraq and Syria.
Certainly Bush's fault in carrying out the Clinton doctrine of regime change in Iraq. Now you have Hillary essentially promising an Iraq-like attack on Iran.

I've maintained for some time that Iraq was as much about Iran as anything else. We ousted a dictator who has been a thorn in the side of the US for decades and sworn enemy of Iran. We ended the potential arms race of two entities who shared only their interest in eliminating Israel. (which I maintain would've prevailed) We set up a theatre in an oil-rich country, smack dab in the Middle East to facilitate a democracy on the most critical foundation possible (resource for prosperity). This, to draw the terrorist element in as opposed to chasing them around in nuclear-Pakistan like you see in our failed action in Afghanistan. The boogey-man of OBL in Afghanistan is just as elusive (if not entirely nonexistent) as the boogey-man of WMDs in Iraq ever was. Afghanistan's worthy resource for prosperity? Poppy farms.

With Iran threatening to use the euro as the standard not unlike Iraq did prior to our invasion and with their predicted saber-rattling and nuclear proliferation, we are stationed in Iraq with the ability to contain them. Let's see if this Administration is as beholden to the conclusions of inspectors as the prior Administration was expected to be in light of a devalued dollar and a derailed domestic policy.
ebuddy
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 4, 2009, 12:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by Taliesin View Post
but with jews as individuals he seems to have no problem.
Then why do they have videos of him chanting along with the throngs "Death to the Jews"? I think that video was posted here in response to such claims you made previously. It's apparent that for a true fundamentalist like him and that regime Jews are tolerable only if they live in submission to Islam.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Taliesin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 4, 2009, 03:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
Then why do they have videos of him chanting along with the throngs "Death to the Jews"? I think that video was posted here in response to such claims you made previously.
As far as I know the iranians and ahmadinejad, too, chanted "Death to America", "Death to Israel"... but I have never heard that he chanted "Death to jews".

In every interview he made clear that he respects the people of america and the jews as well, that his enmity is directed at the american government and Israel as a state. Of course this could be just a trick, but from his sayings I have never read or heard differently, so I'm curious to know about this.

Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
It's apparent that for a true fundamentalist like him and that regime Jews are tolerable only if they live in submission to Islam.
It may well be the case that he seeks that jews convert to Islam or pay the jizja-tax, but the point is that it is very different from Hawkeye's accusation in this thread, that he seeks like Hitler the physical destruction of jews no matter what.

By the way, I have a question to you: Now that we know that Ahmadinejad (up to his fifth birthday) and his family were born and practicing jews, would Ahmadinejad be able to apply for israeli citizenship and resettle to Israel after his presidency is over? I have heard that any born jew has the right to live in Israel, so I'm curious if this right is also open to Ahmadinejad.

Taliesin
( Last edited by Taliesin; Oct 4, 2009 at 04:05 PM. )
     
Hawkeye_a  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2009, 07:39 AM
 
The Associated Press: Analysis: A year on, Iran, NKorea threats worsen

So now what ? Will Obama offer up another fig-leaf to this nutjob ?

After analyzing the situation a bit more.... i realized(wonder how i missed it to begin with), Israel could easily fight a completely defensive war and survive(i hope). The main looser(s) if Iran gets the bomb, would be the states in the Arabian gulf, and countries that use that waterway for imports/exports (U.A.E, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq), and since the U.S. has military bases in that region (for obvious strategic reasons).... well i think the U.S. stands to loose the most.

In hindsight, invading Iraq was a terrible strategic decision..... it took away the element(Saddam) which kept the Iranians in check. with Saddam gone Iran was 'freed'. The American military is strained fighting on two fronts(Afghanistan and Iraq), not to mentioned divided. Iraq was such a bad idea...... the real problem was totally missed, Iran. Reminds me of that scene from 'Pirates of Silicon valley' where Jobs was convinced that IBM was 'big brother' with Gates right under his nose on stage.

Also, Taliesin.... Ahmadinejad getting Israel citizenship, when his father was Muslim and his mother was muslim(according to Wiki).... and not to mention his distaste of the State of Israel ? I'll answer your question with another question........ given the fact that 800,000 Jews were expelled from muslim countries in 1947-1948, would they as Israel citizens now, even be allowed to even visit the lives they were forced to leave behind ?
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2009, 10:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
Ahmadinejad's denial of the holocaust is akin to Hitler's denial of the hardships that the Jews had to endure in Europe...inquisitions, etc. denying/disregarding that history, and making up some crazy stories about how they did in fact become successful, leads the lower ignorant groups to vilify them feeding their envy and jealousy of said group, which distracts them from what the real domestic problems are. Thats the similarity imo.

Hitler did not deny the hardships of Jews in Europe, he was creating `hardships' (calling genocide a hardship is pretty cynical, though).

You compare two situations that have little in common and your myopic focus on Iran distracts from much more dangerous countries: Pakistan and North Korea with Pakistan being on top of the list. Iran's interest in nuclear weapons lies in improving its stance in the region and protecting it from preliminary strikes. They have little interest and no chance in a military confrontation against Israel: just have a look at a map, the Iranian army would have to go through Iraq and/or Saudi Arabia as well as Jordan at the very least. The Iranian leadership is tyrannical, fanatic, but it's not insane. And there is an opposition (which to my knowledge shares a lot of antisemitic points of views) that pushes the country towards democracy.

Plus, in your last post, you perpetuate the mistake that has gotten the world into this mess in the first place: manipulate regional politics for short-term gains. Hind sight is 20-20 as we all know, but at one point, it was more opportune to keep the Shah in power or support Saddam Hussein. And now it's more convenient to wish Saddam Hussein back, because he was `our' bastard? How about we keep our noses out of the internal affairs of other countries (without being ready to defend allies, of course)?
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Taliesin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2009, 04:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
Also, Taliesin.... Ahmadinejad getting Israel citizenship, when his father was Muslim and his mother was muslim(according to Wiki).... and not to mention his distaste of the State of Israel ?
His parents converted to Islam when Ahmadinejad was a child, but they and him were born jews and according to the rules of Israel any born jew regardless of his/her current religion has the right to israeli citizenship.

A problem might be his staunch anti-Israel-opinion, but then there are some antisemitic russian jews that got their israeli citizenship living now in Israel while hating jews and arabs alike.

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
I'll answer your question with another question........given the fact that 800,000 Jews were expelled from muslim countries in 1947-1948, would they as Israel citizens now, even be allowed to even visit the lives they were forced to leave behind ?
I wish they could, and imho they should be able to do so and even be able to regain their arabic citizenship while renouncing their israeli citizenship, and exactly this has been pondered by the arabic council but up to now no decision was made in this regard yet.
Maybe the issue will be revisited once peace between Israel and its arabic neighbours and the palestinians has been made, after a few decades of normalised relationships have cooled down the scars.

Taliesin
     
Hawkeye_a  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 15, 2009, 08:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post

Hitler did not deny the hardships of Jews in Europe, he was creating `hardships' (calling genocide a hardship is pretty cynical, though).
I was referring to the way Jews were treated in Europe even before Hitler.... the discrimination, Inquisitions, and ghettos, etc. Hitler, i think, seems to perpetuate the myth that Europe's problems were caused by Jews post WWI, which is in contradiction to what they were subject to.

I'm not myopic on the situation. N.Korea is hungry for attention(among other things). Pakistan is the Afghanistan of the cold war era (in terms of our support and relations, etc). Pakistan should never have been allowed to go nuclear (and sell that info to Iran, etc). And the fact that the U.S. admin is still supporting(funding, arms, etc) Pakistan is beyond me. India will probably bear the brunt of it imo, but with an army the size of India i think they will manage to hold their own. But Pakistan, like Afghanistan before it, will come back and bite us imo.

I think this was a complete mess from the get go. Iraq should have been contained, and OBL should have been targeted specifically. The "revenge" mentality in the US post 9/11 is to blame for some shoddy decisions. Now with Pakistan and Iran on the brink, it'll be next-to impossible for the U.S. to contain and keep the situation stable, which will inevitably effect the world's oil supply in a negative way. I'm not sure the current world economy can stomach such a blow easily. And Europe, it seems, is content to sit on the sideline and play the debating game.

With me, drawing parallels to 1939..... here we have a quasi-dictator who has 'won' a second term. While Hitler was against the Jews people, Ahmadinejad seems to only have a problem when it comes to Jewish sovereignty, on what he believes should be Muslim administered land. He might put up a front where he entertains Iranians Jews, but that shouldn't distract from the fact that the number of Jews in Iranian have been steadily falling as a percentage(no i do not have a source). He obviously has no problem with them as he is the one in power in that 'relationship'.

As far as U.S. keeping it's nose outside the affairs of these countries. I too at one time was naive enough to consider such a notion, and think of that as the 'silver bullet' for this mess. Then i thought about the cold war, and what would have happened if the USSR has control of the region, and what that would have done to the U.S. and Europe. Post cold war, it was considerable investments from the west that enabled those resources(oil) to be discovered, drilled and refined. Had the people who were residing on those natural resources been capable of doing all that, the U.S.(and others) wouldn't have to have made such investments in infrastructure that need protecting. (it's vaguely comparable to the Sainai campaigns, when Egypt essentially 'stole' the work done on the Suez by the British and the French by claiming it was under Egypt's sovereignty(and hence command the revenue streams AFTER the work was completed)).

Also, i'm sure you might have noted from my earlier posts, that i too lived on the Arabian peninsular. And make no mistake, it was evident even in the mid-90s, the choice was to either side with Iran or with the U.S. They ended up siding with the Americans (hence all the bases). And in exchange for 'protection' from Iran, we would have a steady stream of oil and strategic bases in the region, etc. If the U.S. were to pull out, that would essentially leave the entire Arabian peninsular exposed and vulnerable (even against the will of the Arabs in that region mind you). The Arabs in the region know that their choice(politically) is either Iran or the U.S., and to pull out completely would have dire consequences on them and us, and therefore, imo is not an option.
     
Hawkeye_a  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 15, 2009, 09:08 AM
 
Originally Posted by Taliesin View Post
His parents converted to Islam when Ahmadinejad was a child, but they and him were born jews and according to the rules of Israel any born jew regardless of his/her current religion has the right to israeli citizenship.

A problem might be his staunch anti-Israel-opinion, but then there are some antisemitic russian jews that got their israeli citizenship living now in Israel while hating jews and arabs alike.



I wish they could, and imho they should be able to do so and even be able to regain their arabic citizenship while renouncing their israeli citizenship, and exactly this has been pondered by the arabic council but up to now no decision was made in this regard yet.
Maybe the issue will be revisited once peace between Israel and its arabic neighbours and the palestinians has been made, after a few decades of normalised relationships have cooled down the scars.

Taliesin
Yup, his anti-israeli opinion would be the problem . although i really wonder why his regime is so bent on the destruction of Israel. Prior to his threats i cant think of anything Israel might have done to deserve such anger from a country(or just man/political party) that doesnt even share a border with Israel. Any theories ?


As far as normalized relations with the Arab world. ...i too hope that some day that would come to fruition (on the existing frontiers). Jerusalem will be a messy issue to contend with, but anything is possible. If both Egypt and Jordan could make peace, i dont see why Lebanon(apart from Iranian opposition) cannot follow. And i'm sure even with Syria peace *should* be possible with a demilitarized zone, etc. Maybe the leaders of Lebanon and Syria are afraid of the fate that met Sadat after he made peace ?
( Last edited by Hawkeye_a; Dec 15, 2009 at 11:56 AM. )
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Dec 15, 2009, 01:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
I was referring to the way Jews were treated in Europe even before Hitler.... the discrimination, Inquisitions, and ghettos, etc. Hitler, i think, seems to perpetuate the myth that Europe's problems were caused by Jews post WWI, which is in contradiction to what they were subject to.
Why do you write `seems to perpetuate the myth,' Hitler was propagating the myth that Jews are responsible for much of the problems.
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
Pakistan is the Afghanistan of the cold war era (in terms of our support and relations, etc).
I don't get that. The war in Afghanistan was a proxy war. Pakistan has nuclear weapons, it is not a proxy.
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
Pakistan should never have been allowed to go nuclear (and sell that info to Iran, etc). And the fact that the U.S. admin is still supporting(funding, arms, etc) Pakistan is beyond me.
I think it's obvious why the US is supporting Pakistan, and for the same reason they are supporting Mubarak in Egypt: they want to back the side that opposes Islamic fundamentalists. In case of Pakistan, this is particularly important: if there is a, say, Taliban-backed coup, the Taliban had access to nuclear weapons. Unlike Iran -- which is posturing a lot and uses the possibility of nuclear armament as a deterrent against attacks from the US and Israel -- I think the Taliban are actually unstable enough so that they are tempted to use nuclear weapons.
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
With me, drawing parallels to 1939..... here we have a quasi-dictator who has 'won' a second term. While Hitler was against the Jews people, Ahmadinejad seems to only have a problem when it comes to Jewish sovereignty, on what he believes should be Muslim administered land. He might put up a front where he entertains Iranians Jews, but that shouldn't distract from the fact that the number of Jews in Iranian have been steadily falling as a percentage(no i do not have a source). He obviously has no problem with them as he is the one in power in that 'relationship'.

...
I can't make heads or tails of the remaining paragraphs, sorry.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Osedax
Forum Regular
Join Date: Dec 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 16, 2009, 03:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
The situations(global) is starting to look awful familiar, don't you think ?
No, especially not to Germany pre-WWII.

While the rest of the world looks the other way or tries to appease him...... despite his constant and unjustified threats to destroy a nation.
The rest of the world absolutely is not looking the other way. The US and Europe have impossed extensive sanctions and are already considering more.

Honestly, after they found(yeah someone broke the news before they 'admitted it') the second reactor and then the long range missile tests yesterday.. i am in awe at the fact that absolutely NO ACTION or firm DECISION has been taken.
The missile test yesterday was ... yesterday. Its not like there's been a lot of time to react to it.

The line has been crossed in my opinion, and diplomacy and the U.N. has failed. All they are good for is twiddling their thumbs and wasting precious time.
Unlike Germany, Iran does not have the ability to start a world war. First, it would only be "world" in so much as it would be the world vs Iran. Second, even if they did start a war, they don't have the ability to do anything significant.

Are they working on such an ability? Yes, but if they use nuclear weapons, they will be completely destroyed.
( Last edited by Osedax; Dec 16, 2009 at 03:19 PM. )
     
Osedax
Forum Regular
Join Date: Dec 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 16, 2009, 03:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by Arty50 View Post
People, get a grip.
It's ammusing that you tell others to "get a grip" then rant about Iraq WMDs and how Bush would have gone to war. I suggest you heed your own advise...
     
Osedax
Forum Regular
Join Date: Dec 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 16, 2009, 03:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
i realized(wonder how i missed it to begin with), Israel could easily fight a completely defensive war and survive(i hope).
Israel is estimated to have around 400 nuclear weapons. If any serious attempt was made to destroy Israel, any and all nations involved would be destroyed. So yes, Israel is more then capable of defending itself.

The main looser(s) if Iran gets the bomb, would be the states in the Arabian gulf, and countries that use that waterway for imports/exports (U.A.E, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq)
What are you suggesting, that Iran would somehow use a bomb to block or control the waterways?

and since the U.S. has military bases in that region (for obvious strategic reasons).... well i think the U.S. stands to loose the most.
I really have no idea how you conclude that the US has the most to lose in the region if Iran gets nuclear weapons? Are you suggesting Iran would intimidate us with them to get us to pull our bases out?

In hindsight, invading Iraq was a terrible strategic decision.....
This is something that is way to early to determine. If Iraq continues to grow and become more prosperous, then the invasion will have been a hugely positive event in the ME.

it took away the element(Saddam) which kept the Iranians in check. with Saddam gone Iran was 'freed'. The American military is strained fighting on two fronts(Afghanistan and Iraq), not to mentioned divided.
Such an odd analysis. Think of it from Iran's perspective.

The US currently has two massive armies both on different borders of Iran, one of the East and one on the West. That can't leave Iran feeling very safe. To say Iran is "free" with this presence right on their borders is, I don't know, kinda odd really.

And things aren't looking much better for Iran going forward either. Even after we pull most of our troops out of Iraq, Iraq is now considered a key allie and, much like Kuwait, Iran would have to be keenly aware that the US could step in if they made any aggressive moves against Iraq. And of course we still have a massive army in Afghanistan.
     
Arty50
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2000
Location: I've moved so many times; I forgot.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 16, 2009, 03:56 PM
 
A bit late to the party, eh?

Bush was most definitely upping the Iran rhetoric when he was still in office. And considering the fact that he had pretty much alienated the rest of the world when it came to diplomacy in these situations combined with the fact that his administration refused to talk to Iran at all, what logical conclusion would you expect other than us bombing Iran? But I will conceed your point that it's merely conjecture. Bush's term expired, and we are where we are in time.

All that aside, comparing modern day Iran to Germany in 1939 is just nuts. Germany essentially took over all of Europe for a short period of time. Iran would have to conquer and occupy the entire Middle East. First of all, they don't have the army to do that. Even if they did, it would be a nearly impossible task due to the geography involved. Heck, look at the problems the much larger and infinitely more sophisticated US military is having just in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's what I mean by "get a grip." What's being proposed just isn't possible right now or in the near future.
"My friend, there are two kinds of people in this world:
those with loaded guns, and those who dig. You dig."

-Clint in "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly"
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 16, 2009, 04:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by Arty50 View Post
Let the UN do it's job.
Muahahaha

And what job would that be ?

A blow job for a fellow UN member ?
A hand job for some useless UN agency ?

-t
     
Osedax
Forum Regular
Join Date: Dec 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 16, 2009, 04:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by Arty50 View Post
A bit late to the party, eh?
I like to think of it as fashionably late.

All that aside, comparing modern day Iran to Germany in 1939 is just nuts. Germany essentially took over all of Europe for a short period of time. Iran would have to conquer and occupy the entire Middle East. First of all, they don't have the army to do that. Even if they did, it would be a nearly impossible task due to the geography involved. Heck, look at the problems the much larger and infinitely more sophisticated US military is having just in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's what I mean by "get a grip." What's being proposed just isn't possible right now or in the near future.
Overall I agree.
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:46 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,