Fuel of words Sparks a War.

[Sock Full of Boiled Dimes]

*sigh*

Iran Leader Calls for Israel's Destruction 6 minutes ago

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/14ee1ccc-465b-11da-8880-00000e2511c8.html



TEHRAN, Iran - Iran's hard-line president called for Israel to be "wiped off the map" and said a new wave of Palestinian attacks will destroy the Jewish state, state-run media reported Wednesday.

ADVERTISEMENT

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also denounced attempts to recognize Israel or normalize relations with it.

"There is no doubt that the new wave (of attacks) in Palestine will wipe off this stigma (Israel) from the face of the Islamic world," Ahmadinejad told students Wednesday during a Tehran conference called "The World without Zionism."

"Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury, any (Islamic leader) who recognizes the Zionist regime means he is acknowledging the surrender and defeat of the Islamic world," Ahmadinejad said.

Ahmadinejad also repeated the words of the founder of Iran's Islamic revolution, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who called for the destruction of Israel.

"As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map," said Ahmadinejad, who came to power in August.

Ahmadinejad referred to Israel's recent withdrawal from the Gaza Strip as a "trick," saying Gaza is part of the Palestinian territories and the withdrawal was meant to make Islamic states acknowledge Israel.

[shimanotaka]

Could you give us a link to the source, please...

[more cheerios]

FOMG, Apocolypse. Yep, it's the apocolypse, people. Thank you, Iran! >:00

[shimanotaka]

FOMG, Apocolypse. Yep, it's the apocolypse, people. Thank you, Iran! >:00

Do you believe everything you read without checking it's authenticity first?

[more cheerios]

Do you believe everything you read without checking it's authenticity first?
Did you actually think I was being serious?

[Invictus]

It's an AP (http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/world/wire/sns-ap-iran-israel,0,5804449.story?coll=sns-ap-world-headlines) article.

[kyaa the catlord]

Teh sky is falling teh skye!!!

[that guy]

Wait a sec.... Iran hates Israel?!

[Praetorian]

Wait a sec.... Iran hates Israel?!


Welcome to the real world. How was your sleep?

[that guy]

Welcome to the real world. How was your sleep?

I'm assuming that you know that I wasn't serious.

[Sock Full of Boiled Dimes]

Could you give us a link to the source, please...

Sorry, I wasn't aware that I needed to seeing how it was a well written Associated Press article and I'm just a forum user.

[Mechs]

"Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury, any (Islamic leader) who recognizes the Zionist regime means he is acknowledging the surrender and defeat of the Islamic world," Ahmadinejad said.

.....................soooooooo is this like a threat or something.

[Jon885]

I went on CNN and didn't find anything. You would think something like this would be the first story. Maybe not.

[Saitou Hajime]

Go to Google and type in "Israel", the top part will come back with news results about this.

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/14ee1ccc-465b-11da-8880-00000e2511c8.html

[DarkFire168]

Oo;;; Fucking islam and israel. I say we turn the middle east into a giant parking lot... then we'd have somewhere to park when we turn france into the worlds largest disneyland.

[The Divine Comedy]

Well shit. Another war for Sir Bush to interfere in. *headdesk*

[Anubis Nine]

Probably not a real war.

And perhaps if Israel was at the boarders specified in the 1948 agreements other countries MIGHT (Probably not) hate them so much. At any case, they wouldn't have any justification for it and Israel would actually be able to say 'they just hate us because we're jews,'

[Jai]

Never mind the fact that all other territory held by Israel was taken in counter attacks launched after Islamic nations attacked them. God forbid the facts get in the way of a good jew stomp.

You dont see the leaders, religeous or political, of Israel spouting crap like "we must destroy all islam" or "Iran must be destroyed".

They hate them just because theyre jews. Its completely and utterly 100% fact.

[rush]

Wow. I could never get why Jews are so hated.

[shimanotaka]

Originally Posted by number17
Sorry, I wasn't aware that I needed to seeing how it was a well written Associated Press article and I'm just a forum user.

Well written or not, it's always nice to have the original source. And you didn't say it was an AP article... You DO know how much disinformation that is spread over the net every day?

[Zonehunter1]

If was really real, wouldn't every goddamn american new channel and web site be ablaze in Headlines about this?

[psychoflex]

Wow. I could never get why Jews are so hated.

jews are not hated by muslims. they have the right to live, believe and work whatever they want, as long as they pay a "jew tax" and accept that they are ruled by muslims. ( thats what i at least remember...)
its the state of israel thats hated, not the jewish population!

Wait a sec.... Iran hates Israel?!
hmmm, lemme think... yes, iran hates israel since 1979. and if you didnt already know, the hizbullah is irans little terrorist group terrorizing israel since 1982.

why did the usa attack iraq, which had no WMD and no real army, and not Iran? easy, iran has a well trained and well equipped army, real WMD and soon they'll have nukes. what kind of idiot would attack a country that could defend itself? there won't be a war, iran will have nukes in a few years, why shouldn't they have any? israel has some too!

the article doesnt say anything new... old and boring news. go and read some newspaper articles from the 1980s about iran-israel relations.

[Phlips79]

Never mind the fact that all other territory held by Israel was taken in counter attacks launched after Islamic nations attacked them. God forbid the facts get in the way of a good jew stomp.

You dont see the leaders, religeous or political, of Israel spouting crap like "we must destroy all islam" or "Iran must be destroyed".

They hate them just because theyre jews. Its completely and utterly 100% fact.

Quoted for truth.

[that guy]

We had a discussion about this a loooong time ago in my sociology class. Iran hating Israel simply isn't newsworthy because this has been going on for decades. It's like the New York Times posting an article about Wiley Coyote hating Road Runner....

Basically, they need someone on whom to focus their anger, sort of like 1984 and the 2 minutes hate. They are redirecting the anger so that the citizens don't realize the poverty plaguing their population.

My teacher told us about her cousin (a suicide bomber) who lost his life over a hate that he didn't even understand. Yeah, she's biased as hell, but that doesn't discount the validity of her statement.

[Phlips79]

We had a discussion about this a loooong time ago in my sociology class. Iran hating Israel simply isn't newsworthy because this has been going on for decades. It's like the New York Times posting an article about Wiley Coyote hating Road Runner....

Are you seriously comparing one UN member advocating the obliteration of another UN member to Coyote and Road Runner?

Are you for real? Iran's political stance on Israel has very real and dire consequences. The country is pursuing a nuclear program, which they claim to be peaceful, but you have to wonder when they're actively voicing an agenda of genocide.

Last time I checked, no one died in the making of a cartoon...

[that guy]

Are you seriously comparing one UN member advocating the obliteration of another UN member to Coyote and Road Runner?

Are you for real? Iran's political stance on Israel has very real and dire consequences. The country is pursuing a nuclear program, which they claim to be peaceful, but you have to wonder when they're actively voicing an agenda of genocide.

Last time I checked, no one died in the making of a cartoon...

*Sigh* It's called using a popular media reference as an analogy in order to make a point. Iran supports terrorism. Iran hates Israel. Nothing new. We know this. Do you see the parallel?

[Radiance]

This is an outrage, The nation of Wiley Coyote has never been anything but a peaceful nation. that guy's claims against our nation are absurd and show that you fear our awesome ACME products. Clearly we have a valid reason for owning said products and that reason is clearing the land speed record. The nation of Wiley Coyote has never had anything but respect and compassion for our neighbor Road Runner. Hate is a very strong word, one we would not use without good reason. We do not have hate for the road runner, we just want to eat him. :x

Also, on a more serious note, I honestly don't care if bush interferes with a possible war in that area. Know why I don't care? Over a decade of unbridled hate. its like if the KKK had their own nation. I mean hell, even their previous president who was on a reform platform didn't like Israel, what was it not good enough to just dislike them? "You know what, i'm sick of this, all he does is talk about what he will do, we need someone in office that will take action!" "Yeah! You're right!" Frankly, I hope anyone who starts a war over race, religion, or otherwise is wiped off the planet as that seems to be the only way we're going to get rid of them and their hate. -.-

[that guy]

This is an outrage, The nation of Wiley Coyote has never been anything but a peaceful nation. that guy's claims against our nation are absurd and show that you fear our awesome ACME products.

Wow... am I that transparent :) ?

They probably will just continue spewing rhetoric. They need the Jews to divert attention from what really matters.

"Huh, what's that? You're poor and hungry? HEY, LOOK AT THAT DAMNED JEW OVER THERE! WATCH OUT BEFORE HE DOES YOUR TAXES!!!" /lame joke attempt

[Radiance]

Addtional note: No, I am not looking to go to war, I have friends in the military and don't want to see them go off again, unsure if I will ever get to see them again, hang out, etc. I don't want to see a war happen because war means loss of life and a lot of other very negative things. I honestly hope something is done by the international community that solves issues without war and puts an end to hate and "terrorism". (I hate that word so much, it seems like a propaganda tool and I hate hearing about that kind of bullshit.) I just want to see all of this crap come to an end, the world has too many issues without asshats going out and making more of them because they've got a tiny penis, or whatever reason you want to give them.

[Phlips79]

*Sigh* It's called using a popular media reference as an analogy in order to make a point. Iran supports terrorism. Iran hates Israel. Nothing new. We know this. Do you see the parallel?

*Sigh* my point was that your attempt at using an analogy was out of place and inappropriate. If you're going to use tools of rhetoric, then at least use them in the proper manner. Maybe you could equate the Holocaust with Bugs Bunny tricking Daffy Duck into saying it's duck season and getting shot?

Do you see the parallel?

[Radiance]

Additional additional note: Please forgive my previous remark about tiny penises, should anyone be offended by it. It was not ment to make fun of anyone that views that as an issue they face in their life. It was meant more as an example of how absurd the reasons for their hate against Israel are. Everyone is different, it is those differences we should value, not view them as a negative aspect of yourself as a person.

[that guy]

*Sigh* my point was that your attempt at using an analogy was out of place and inappropriate. If you're going to use tools of rhetoric, then at least use them in the proper manner. Maybe you could equate the Holocaust with Bugs Bunny tricking Daffy Duck into saying it's duck season and getting shot?

Do you see the parallel?

When it is used to properly relate the point to the reader, which is the case here, then it is being used appropriately. My point was that a well known, damned near universal fact was unnecessarily being focused on, which is exactly why I used such a well known character.
The problem is the fact that you looked at it, ignored the point being made, and thought to yourself, "Is he comparing death to cartoons?"

[Phlips79]

When it is used to properly relate the point to the reader, which is the case here, then it is being used appropriately. My point was that a well known, damned near universal fact was unnecessarily being focused on, which is exactly why I used such a well known character.
The problem is the fact that you looked at it, ignored the point being made, and thought to yourself, "Is he comparing death to cartoons?"

Wow, you're still 0 for 2.

I couldn't give a rat's behind if you decided to use a Wile E. Coyote/Roadrunner analogy because Iran's hatred of Israel is a well known fact.

I took offense to the fact that you compared decades' worth of Arab desire to see one group of people annihalated because they are Jews to a cartoon.

Do you need a simpler breakdown? I can oblige.

[that guy]

Wow, you're still 0 for 2.

I couldn't give a rat's behind if you decided to use a Wile E. Coyote/Roadrunner analogy because Iran's hatred of Israel is a well known fact.

I took offense to the fact that you compared decades' worth of Arab desire to see one group of people annihalated to a cartoon.

Do you need a simpler breakdown? I can oblige.

Condescension really isn't one of your strengths. I used an analogy that everyone would understand. Period. If you "take offense," then too bad; I'm not going to pander to someone who feels the need to find deeper meaning in something so basic.

[Praetorian]

Stop the flaming, guys. Say you're sorry and you didn't mean to be smegheads.

[that guy]

Well, I stand by my analogy, but I will agree to shake hands and call it a day.

[Phlips79]

Condescension really isn't one of your strengths. I used an analogy that everyone would understand. Period. If you "take offense," then too bad; I'm not going to pander to someone who feels the need to find deeper meaning in something so basic.

If you can't see why it's offensive, then you have some serious reading to do.

Try looking up the 6 Day War or Arab-Israeli war and find just WHY the wars started. You'll find that it was because Arab states begand the Headwater Conversion Plan, which would funnel water out of the Dan/Baniyes so that Israel would be without water. After that, further violence was instigated when Jordanian terrorists started placing land mines on the Israeli side of the border, killing soldiers. This becomes an escalation of terrorism and violence against Israel to include a marine blockade of the seaports, which ultimately ends up as the 6 Day War with Egypt, Jordan, and Syria.

Why did all of this happen? President Nasser himself said "Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight."

Ever since Israel has come into existence, it has been the policy of the Arab states to obliterate it and the Jews within.

If you can't understand why comparing the President of Iran saying that Israel should be "wiped off the face of the map" to a Roadrunner/Coyote cartoon is morally reprehensible, then you have a serious lack of moral foundation. Since you're so fond of analogies, it would be the equivalent of comparing 9/11 to a Cartoon. That's sick.

[that guy]

You still don't get the point. Don't assume that you are special for knowing something that most people already know. It does not make you look intelligent.

If I can simplify a point by comparing it to the popular media -- magazines, movies, AND cartoons -- then I will. Period. There is nothing wrong with using a cartoon if there is a valid point to be made using the comparison.

Would you have objected if I compared the incident to the Montagues and the Capulets instead?

[kiev33]

If I may chip in, the way I took the analogy was that it was a snide remark on the attention span of the public, and that something was so generally well know, as is this cartoon, that it was not really something the general public was interested in anymore. I saw it more as commentary on the sad state of the public's interst in truly newsworthy material.

[Kikuchiyo]

that guy has a point, in that Iran has always called for the destruction of Israel. And Phlips has a point about comparing horrible acts to cartoons. Let's all just sit down and discuss the real issue here, which is who gets the oil once both countries wipe each other off the map?

[kiev33]

that guy has a point, in that Iran has always called for the destruction of Israel. And Phlips has a point about comparing horrible acts to cartoons. Let's all just sit down and discuss the real issue here, which is who gets the oil once both countries wipe each other off the map?

I used to think we would, until we invaded iraq. We haven't seen a drop of that cheap oil. I'm still waiting for my tank to be cheaper, and it just keeps going up. WTF, over.

[Phlips79]

You still don't get the point. Don't assume that you are special for knowing something that most people already know. It does not make you look intelligent.

If I can simplify a point by comparing it to the popular media -- magazines, movies, AND cartoons -- then I will. Period. There is nothing wrong with using a cartoon if there is a valid point to be made using the comparison.

Would you have objected if I compared the incident to the Montagues and the Capulets instead?

No really, seriously, for the last time. I don't care that you were using it as a method to point out that the topic is well-known, and a dead horse. Really, it's irrelevant. What I was saying, is that the use of THAT analogy is inapparopriate given the amount of blood spillt in the region already and the amount that will be spillt in the future.

You never responded...would you compare 9/11 to a cartoon? Yeah, I didn't think so. To Israelis dying every day from suicide bombings and mortars, another Arab state threatening their annihalation is no laughing matter on the level of a cartoon.

And while a reference to Shakespeare is a little less offensive, seeing as how poeple take it seriously, it's still a little off.

the way I took the analogy was that it was a snide remark on the attention span of the public, and that something was so generally well know, as is this cartoon, that it was not really something the general public was interested in anymore. I saw it more as commentary on the sad state of the public's interst in truly newsworthy material.

If the poster had meant it in that manner, which you described, then yes I would have to agree. Violence in the Mid East has been so commonplace that people are complacent about it. However, the only point he ever drove home was:

Nothing new.

That's a far cry from making a commentary on how complacent the world has become on Middle East violence.

[Phlips79]

Let's all just sit down and discuss the real issue here, which is who gets the oil once both countries wipe each other off the map?


I bet glass gets dirt cheap. Excuse the pun.

Seriously though, you've got a maniac who is pursuing a nuclear program, which we assume is for producing weapons grade Uranium and he's threatening the extinction of one of our allies in the region.

There's always been a large amount of saber rattling, but one has to question why in this case. What would Iran have to gain from tempting UN sanctions, and a nuclear reprisal from the United States if they did launch a nuke into Israel?

[that guy]

How many people would have gotten that reference? How many people read Shakespeare? I could have used it, but people would have had to look it up, which would have defeated the purpose. The purpose of the analogy was to facilitate understanding.

AP posting that Iran encouraged violence against Israel is tantamount to saying that Wiley Coyote wants to kill Road Runner. Of course, the two are not the same. One involves actual death, while the other is a show designed to amuse kids. That goes without saying.

Both events had in common the fact that they don't need to be reported. That's it. A cartoon probably isn't the best choice, but it was the most widely recognized, which is why I used it.

Let's just end this?

[Phlips79]

Both events had in common the fact that they don't need to be reported.


I disagree. There's 2 big differences between what happened yesterday and in 1967.

1) All countries involved are now part of the UN. They're expected to resolved differences diplomatically, and play like big boys, not screaming at each other and lobbing missiles. In addition, this the first time in history that one member of the UN has called for the destruction of another UN member.

2) Iran is actively seeking nuclear technology, which it claims is for peaceful purposed, yet it has refused IAEA inspections. Given that Iran fears a US-led Iraq and the only way for it to influence politics in the region is to interfere with Iraq or saber-rattle Israel. Since Iraq is comprised of primarily Shiite Muslims, Iran's best interest would be to not meddle with Iraq since it might spur a Shiite on Shiite conflict. So their best method is to threaten Israel to garner the support of Arab states in the region.

Given those 2 facts, this is a whole new dillemma, and a whole new game of politics with the stakes quite a bit higher.

So, yes, it's very newsworthy.

[more cheerios]

HOLY WAR. It'll kill us all.

[Radiance]

Won't kill me. I'll probably die of high blood pressure or a heart attack in my sleep. :x Wow, now that is a realization I don't like. Though I take comfort in the fact I could just as easily die from old age or just working too hard. Guess i'll find out when it happens.

[Sock Full of Boiled Dimes]

Oh yay!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051028/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_israel

[DURRR_GUNDAM]

It doesn't really matter what the president of Iran says, seeing as how he has no real power.

Iran's not going to attack Israel, that's just plain stupid. Attacking Israel is like the MAD agreement with nuclear weapons. Iran doesn't need to attack anyone to protect itself seeing as how it has support from China and Russia, two members of the Security Council.

Besides, Israel and most of the Islamic countries (Not sure about Indonesia) trash talk each other all the time. No one's going to act out what they say. Both sides would lose if they choose to attack the other.

[Sock Full of Boiled Dimes]

Besides, Israel and most of the Islamic countries (Not sure about Indonesia) trash talk each other all the time. No one's going to act out what they say. Both sides would lose if they choose to attack the other.

Except that Palistine suicide bombs Israel ever day that ends with a "y" and Israel responds by blowing the crap out of some Palistines.

Oh yes...nothing EVER happens.

[DURRR_GUNDAM]

I'm talking about actual military strikes.

The suicide bombers are part of various factions idolizing their own interpretation of some ideology, not part of governments of the Islamic countries.

[DURRR_GUNDAM]

Besides, as mentioned before in this thread, saying threats to Israel's been done to death. It's nothing new. They're just sensationalizing this one because Iran has a nuclear program which the West opposes.

Iran mostly needs the nuclear tech to power itself. They would save great amounts of money if they switched from their current reactors to nuclear reactors. But yes, they will eventually develop nuclear weapons and nuclear weapons are a threat to the world, no matter which countries have it.