Is Ahmadinejad mentally unstable?

sovtek

Mick86 wrote:

Apart from the Iran-Iraq War and the recent little misunderstanding in Lebanon that is. Quite frankly the thought of Iranian nukes should scare everyone on the planet s**tless.

Ummmm Iraq attacked Iran with a little help from his friends at the time...ie Donald Rummy

RedPlanet

We all remember the Iranian president penned a letter to GWB and what did he do? Did he sit down with quill in hand and pen a well worded letter back, to try and reach some consensus with his Iranian counterpart? Did he use the opportunity to bridge the divide or at least move things from accusations to conversation?
Of course not, sure GWB is no statesman.
He's a spoilt little redneck that didn't grow up, still playing cowboy n' injuns.


Is GWB mentally stable?
That is surely a fairer question. Afterall, he's a recovering alcoholic. (that never attended an AA meeting or other counseling)

sovtek

RedPlanet wrote:

We all remember the Iranian president penned a letter to GWB and what did he do? Did he sit down with quill in hand and pen a well worded letter back, to try and reach some consensus with his Iranian counterpart? Did he use the opportunity to bridge the divide or at least move things from accusations to conversation?
Of course not, sure GWB is no statesman.
He's a spoilt little redneck that didn't grow up, still playing cowboy n' injuns.


Is GWB mentally stable?
That is surely a fairer question. Afterall, he's a recovering alcoholic. (that never attended an AA meeting or other counseling)

He's known as the Xanax cowboy.

oscarBravo

mike65 wrote:

Ahmadinejad is also a holocaust denier is'nt he?

Is he? Genuine question. Have you anything to back this up?

toomevara

oscarBravo wrote:

Is he? Genuine question. Have you anything to back this up?

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Thursday expressed doubt the Holocaust took place and suggested the Jewish state of Israel be moved to Europe.

His comments, reported by Iran's official IRNA news agency from a news conference he gave in the Saudi Arabian city of Mecca, follow his call in October for Israel to be "wiped off the map", which sparked widespread international outrage.

The latest comments also provoked quick condemnation. German Chancellor Angela Merkel called them "totally unacceptable" and British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said "I condemn them unreservedly. They have no place in civilised political debate."

Ahmadinejad was quoted by IRNA as saying: "Some European countries insist on saying that Hitler killed millions of innocent Jews in furnaces and they insist on it to the extent that if anyone proves something contrary to that they condemn that person and throw them in
jail."

"Although we don't accept this claim, if we suppose it is true, our question for the Europeans is: is the killing of innocent Jewish people by Hitler the reason for their support to the occupiers of Jerusalem?" he said.

oscarBravo

Ta.

Schuhart

RedPlanet wrote:

Is GWB mentally stable?
That is surely a fairer question. Afterall, he's a recovering alcoholic. (that never attended an AA meeting or other counseling)

I’d say an equally fair question, and his speed to coin phrases like Islamic Fascism deserves all the attention it gets.

I just don’t see the apparent need for us to manufacture apologies for the Iranian President making inflammatory statements about Israel or casting doubt on the Holocaust. That might be the kind of thing that goes down well in the equivalent of the Kevin Barry Cummain in the Tehran North Central constituency. But I don’t see why we need to duck, dive or generally avoid acknowledging that this is part of the reality of the situation.

RedPlanet wrote:

They probably don't like him either, he's Persian.

I see. The conspiracy against Ahmadinejad now comprises Dick Cheney, Israeli intelligence and any non-Persian media outlets.

Do we owe him money? Is he a great man for standing his round? I’m just trying to understand the need to be licking so far up his arse.

RedPlanet

Schuhart wrote:

I’d say an equally fair question, and his speed to coin phrases like Islamic Fascism deserves all the attention it gets.

I just don’t see the apparent need for us to manufacture apologies for the Iranian President making inflammatory statements about Israel or casting doubt on the Holocaust. That might be the kind of thing that goes down well in the equivalent of the Kevin Barry Cummain in the Tehran North Central constituency. But I don’t see why we need to duck, dive or generally avoid acknowledging that this is part of the reality of the situation.

I see. The conspiracy against Ahmadinejad now comprises Dick Cheney, Israeli intelligence and any non-Persian media outlets.

Do we owe him money? Is he a great man for standing his round? I’m just trying to understand the need to be licking so far up his arse.

Nobody is "licking his arse" and infact, i find that an offensive thing to say.
Rather I am doubting the accuracy of the translation.
Actions speak a lot louder than words and Bush's actions are clearly more a threat to Iran and other nations in the MiddleEast than Iran's actions are to Israel and the US.
Besides i would think the fact that GWB is self admitted recovering alcoholic (addictive personality) actually provides a sounder base for psychoanalysis than Ahmadinejad's alledged public statements.

uberpixie

http://www.counterpunch.org/cox08072006.html

"u[SIZE=-1]rine samples from President George W. Bush, some of them almost five years old, have shown exceptionally high levels of testosterone, according to leaked reports. [/SIZE] [SIZE=-1]Samples collected and preserved at Bethesda Naval Medical Center in the course of routine presidential check-ups, but not examined for testosterone until recent weeks, indicate that Bush had normal levels of the hormone from January through early September of 2001. However, the Sept. 14 sample -- the first taken after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11 -- shows a sudden and sharp increase in testosterone concentration."[/SIZE]


[SIZE=-1]"[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]Tests showed consistently elevated levels of the hormone in samples taken in 2002 through 2005 as well. White House Press Secretary Tony Snow, while testily dismissing any suggestions that the President has received any testosterone supplements, pointed out that even if he had been doing so, Article One of the US Constitution does not explicitly disqualify a chief executive for hormonal doping."[/SIZE]


[SIZE=-1]Bush in dopping scandal, allegedly :-)[/SIZE]


[SIZE=-1]Really if Iran want nukes, it's to protect themeslves from an invasion from the US and air attacks from Israel.[/SIZE]


[SIZE=-1]Doubt they would be stupid enough to use them, they can't be any crazier than the knuckle dragging Christian fundies in the US in power.[/SIZE]


[SIZE=-1]And really the Irainians have a point, if it was Europeans that commited geneocide on the Jewish people, should it not be European land that was used to setup Israel?[/SIZE]


[SIZE=-1]Why should the people in the Middle East pay the cost of the Holocost, when it happened and was commited in Europe?[/SIZE]


[SIZE=-1]The setting up of Israel was a huge show of disrespect by the Western World to the Middle East in Arab and Persian minds and still burns them to this day.[/SIZE]


[SIZE=-1]Throw in foregin meddling on top of it and you have a great mix
[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]
[/SIZE]

Mick86

RedPlanet wrote:

But that's just it toomevara and Mick86. He didn't call for the destrcution of Israel, nor for Israel to be wiped off the map.
Rather he called for the desruction of the Israeli regime, just like GWB did about Saddam Hussein.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12949.htm

I believe that Ahmadinejad meant exactly what was originally reported, the destruction of Israel and the eradication of the Jews. I don't believe the subsequent explanations of "what he actually said was..." because they are just attempts at damage limitation. I take it that you think the US intervention in Iraq was great for the Iraqis by the way.

RedPlanet

How could you possibly deduce that i'd think US intervention in Iraq was anything but a complete and utter disaster.

Schuhart

RedPlanet wrote:

Nobody is "licking his arse" and infact, i find that an offensive thing to say.

Sorry, that should have been translated as 'promote appropriate anal hygene'. Damn Mossad at it again.

Can you see any irony in your apparent offence, in the context of your wishing away the rather more vitriolic rhetoric of the Iranian President?

RedPlanet wrote:

Rather I am doubting the accuracy of the translation.

Indeed, but there would look to be no need to doubt the translation for any reason other that discomfort at having to face the reality that this is pretty much what he said.

I have no difficulty in facing the reality that the US have given two terms to a conservative Christian President, with all that goes with that. I've no problem with the reality that the Iraq war was a disasterous adventure. I have no problem accepting that Iran has chosen a conservative Islamic President, will all that goes with that.

Again, where is the need to deny reality? Is it so necessary to see the world as divided into saints and devils?

Mick86

RedPlanet wrote:

How could you possibly deduce that i'd think US intervention in Iraq was anything but a complete and utter disaster.

Your previous post implies that you have no problem with Iranian-sponsored regime change in Israel which would be no worse than US-sponsored regime change in Iraq.

RedPlanet

Schuhart wrote:

Can you see any irony in your apparent offence, in the context of your wishing away the rather more vitriolic rhetoric of the Iranian President?
Indeed, but there would look to be no need to doubt the translation for any reason other that discomfort at having to face the reality that this is pretty much what he said.

No, not at all.
Do tell.

Schuhart wrote:

Again, where is the need to deny reality? Is it so necessary to see the world as divided into saints and devils?

Who is denying reality?
It is absolutely not necessary to "see the world as saints and devils" as you say.
:rolleyes:

Schuhart

Mick86 wrote:

Your previous post implies that you have no problem with Iranian-sponsored regime change in Israel which would be no worse than US-sponsored regime change in Iraq.

This is, more or less, the size of it.

RedPlanet

Mick86 wrote:

Your previous post implies that you have no problem with Iranian-sponsored regime change in Israel which would be no worse than US-sponsored regime change in Iraq.

No it doesn't.
It means that i defend the Iranian's President right to SAY it.

Schuhart

RedPlanet wrote:

No it doesn't.
It means that i defend the Iranian's President right to SAY it.

Do you see any consequences flowing from the fact that the Iranian President makes such comments?

RedPlanet

Schuhart wrote:

Do you see any consequences flowing from the fact that the Iranian President makes such comments?

Do you see any consequences flowing from the actions taken by USA and Britain to create Israel in the first place?

Schuhart

RedPlanet wrote:

Do you see any consequences flowing from the actions taken by USA and Britain to create Israel in the first place?

Absolutely. Without writing a book about it, it created a displaced nation who quite reasonably asked 'where's our country', and set off a chain of events that brings us to the current unhappy position. However, much as traditional Irish nationalists have to get used to the idea that Unionists are here to stay, both Israelis and Palestinians have to get used to the idea that they are both around.

I've no problem acknowledging realities. Now, do you see any consequences flowing from the fact that the Iranian President makes such comments, or would you rather duck and dive by asking me another question?

RedPlanet

No, i see no consequences of the Iranian president making such statements, bar boosting his popularity at home.
Like i said, he can say what he likes.

unkel

I don't think he's mentally unstable. His logic is crystal clear:

Israel as a state currently exists because it was given to the jews as compensation for the holocaust. The holocaust didn't happen. Therefore the jews currently in Israel should go back to where they came from and the state of Israel should be dismantled

He'll have a nuke soon. I'm scared.

Schuhart

RedPlanet wrote:

No, i see no consequences of the Iranian president making such statements, bar boosting his popularity at home.
Like i said, he can say what he likes.

Fine. For my part, I find your view lacks all credibility, and shows a massive bias in approaching this whole agenda.

RedPlanet

Schuhart wrote:

Fine. For my part, I find your view lacks all credibility, and shows a massive bias in approaching this whole agenda.

pity.

InFront

Mick86 wrote:

I believe that Ahmadinejad meant exactly what was originally reported, the destruction of Israel and the eradication of the Jews. I don't believe the subsequent explanations of "what he actually said was..." because they are just attempts at damage limitation. I take it that you think the US intervention in Iraq was great for the Iraqis by the way.

I dont know of a longer running debate on boards.
Ahmadinejad is probably a Holocaust denier. There have been so many statements to point to this, and Tehran have never refuted it once, or claimed that the statemtets are misconstrued.
I dont think for one minute that Ahmadinejad is 'afraid' of the USA or afraid of coming up with crazy statements. If blowing up Palestinian homelands were the words he meant, why would he be refuting it so vehemently? Where would the Palestinians even live?
Added to this, the fact that there is no such idiom equivalent to 'wiping out' in Fārsi.

The guy is a PhD in 'town planning' or something. He's probably one of the most boring characters you'd hope to meet, with an odd penchant for attracting media attention. He is a President's version of Michael o Leary.
He gets up GWB's nose, sure, so what? Why do we care?
In another three years he can go and join GWB in some retirement village, let them have their slapping match then.

Mick86

RedPlanet wrote:

No it doesn't.
It means that i defend the Iranian's President right to SAY it.

The right to freedom of expression is not absolute.

The following are taken from the Iranian President’s official website. It's a fair assumption that his own translators got it right.

"If certain Western countries stop supporting Israel then it will be eliminated by itself,"

http://www.president.ir/eng/ahmadinejad/cronicnews/1385/02/21/index-e.htm#b7

"We are curious to know why out of dozens of millions of victims of the World War II, just the loss of lives of the six million people whose genocide has not yet been verified is of importance."

http://www.president.ir/eng/ahmadinejad/cronicnews/1385/03/08/index-e.htm#b1

Ahmadinejad pointed to the meeting dubbed "A World Without Zionism" and criticized those sowing the seed of disappointment in materializing such a goal and attempting to undermine the world of Islam. He added that a world without the US and Israel would be possible.

Speaking at a conference dubbed "World without Zionism" here Wednesday which was attended by thousands of students, he said any country which acknowledges the Zionist regime will actually be acknowledging the surrender and defeat of the Islamic world. 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.

http://www.president.ir/eng/ahmadinejad/cronicnews/1384/08/4/index-e.htm#b2

He said "they suppress any voice under the pretext of maintaining freedom of expression and impose medieval values and manners in modern disguise on nations." The president then expressed his confidence that all kinds of oppression would come to an end once rule of Islam prevails in the whole world.

http://www.president.ir/eng/ahmadinejad/cronicnews/1384/09/27/index-e.htm#b2

The president warned Western countries to start dissociating themselves from the Zionists considering Zionism's imminent annihilation and end of Zionist occupation of Palestinian lands.

http://www.president.ir/eng/ahmadinejad/cronicnews/1384/11/22/index-e.htm#b5

RedPlanet

Mick86 wrote:

The right to freedom of expression is not absolute.

The following are taken from the Iranian President’s official website. It's a fair assumption that his own translators got it right.

Wow, and none of that is particularly threatening.
And certainly doesn't make him mentally unstable.

Mick86

RedPlanet wrote:

Do you see any consequences flowing from the actions taken by USA and Britain to create Israel in the first place?

The US and Britain did not create Israel at all.

The UN appointed a commission of 11 countries (United Nations Special Committee on Palestine) to come up with proposals for the partitioning of the British Mandate of Palestine. The eleven were Canada, Czechslovakia, Guatemala, Holland, Sweden, Peru, Uruguay, India, Iran, Yugoslavia and Australia. India, Iran and Yugoslavia voted for a Federal Palestine, Australian abstained and the majority voted to form two independent states from Palestine with Jerusalem being administered by the UN.

The plan was put to the UN General Assembly on Nov 29th 1947 and a vote approved the partition plan. 33 countries voted in favour of which one was the US, 13 against and 10 abstained. The UK being one of the abstentions.

Mick86

RedPlanet wrote:

Wow, and none of that is particularly threatening.
And certainly doesn't make him mentally unstable.

His statements are particularly threatening to Israel and give the lie to your theory that he has been misquoted.

Don't you like the way he airily dismisses the deaths of six million people as unimportant.

Frederico

Yeah he's saying he doesn't like Israel at all, in strong terms.. time for a pre-emptive war?

Darragh29

toomevara wrote:

Given the increasingly bizarre and esoteric rantings emananting from Mahmood Ahmadinejad I'm starting to believe that he may genuinely be mentally unstable (did anyone see the astonishing interview he gave to Morley Safer recently or his recent pronouncements following a speech at the UN regarding a manifestation of the hidden imam).

Given his stange millenarian desire to create the conditions which lead to the return of the hidden imam should we do all in our power to ensure that the iranian regime does not get its hands on a nuclear weapon? Is an Osirak style attack justified in the light of such an argument?

Don't think what Ahmadinejad said at the UN about the hidden Imam demonstrates mentally instability any more than when George W Bush told us that God told him in a dream to go and invade Iraq.