Mahmoud Ahmadinejad again!

mike65

Issuing idle threats in the direction of Europe this time.

full bbc story

"You imposed a group of terrorists... on the region. It is in your own interest to distance yourself from these criminals... This is an ultimatum. Don't complain tomorrow."

The "ultimatum" was directed at European states in particular.

"We have advised the Europeans that the Americans are far away, but you are the neighbours of the nations in this region," Mr Ahmadinejad said.

"We inform you that the nations are like an ocean that is welling up, and if a storm begins, the dimensions will not stay limited to Palestine, and you may get hurt."

If lets say a cell of Iranian assasins took out a leading Jewish figure in a European state does anyone here think anything would be done in reply or might it be left for Isreal to deal with? ie Europe cops out. I supect so.

Mike.

Akrasia

mike65 wrote:

Issuing idle threats in the direction of Europe this time.

full bbc story



If lets say a cell of Iranian assasins took out a leading Jewish figure in a European state does anyone here think anything would be done in reply or might it be left for Isreal to deal with? ie Europe cops out. I supect so.

Mike.

Ahmadinejad has about as much power as Pat Robertson has in the United States, the world would be a much better place without either of those two people, but he is not the big threat that he is made out to be. The office of president in Iran is similar to the office of president in Ireland.

sovtek

In the "reality" based world it's an unlikely scenario that Ahmadinejad is going to attack anyone. I wonder how much of those quotes were taken out of context or mistranslated.

is_that_so

Isn't it the case that if it's Friday Ahmadinejad is going to say something inflammatory. As likely as not it is tied into reminding us that Iran have not gone away and they are not going to. Any time he says something it tends to be for home consumption, even though it is widely reported. Now imagine if Ahmadinejad had been the one talking about the "axis of terror"

Iran hasn't actually done anything apart from upset everyone with their nuclear ambitions and their usual support of miliant elements.

lostexpectation

israel threatened to bomb unifil positions again if they intefered with israel overflights of lebanon

AbusesToilets

is_that_so wrote:

Isn't it the case that if it's Friday Ahmadinejad is going to say something inflammatory. As likely as not it is tied into reminding us that Iran have not gone away and they are not going to. Any time he says something it tends to be for home consumption, even though it is widely reported. Now imagine if Ahmadinejad had been the one talking about the "axis of terror"

Iran hasn't actually done anything apart from upset everyone with their nuclear ambitions and their usual support of miliant elements.

With respect there has been quite a bit done by the Iranians in formenting trouble in Lebanon with Hezbollah and in Iraq,funding insurgents along with Syria etc.
And most likely the European nations would do nothing in the event of an attack on their soil,either against them or another target

Manic Moran

lostexpectation wrote:

israel threatened to bomb unifil positions again if they intefered with israel overflights of lebanon

UNIFIL needs to equip itself with more SAMs.

And do a better job of facilitating the disarming of Hezbullah.

NTM

Akrasia

Manic Moran wrote:

UNIFIL needs to equip itself with more SAMs.

And do a better job of facilitating the disarming of Hezbullah.

NTM

yeah, cause it's the U.N.s fault when Israel bomb them, and it's the U.N.s fault when Hezbollah attack Israel. It's never Israels fault for anything that happens in the middle east

sovtek

AbusesToilets wrote:

With respect there has been quite a bit done by the Iranians in formenting trouble in Lebanon with Hezbollah and in Iraq,funding insurgents along with Syria etc.
And most likely the European nations would do nothing in the event of an attack on their soil,either against them or another target

Obviously you aren't aware of what the Spanish government did after the Madrid attack.
Secondly...you got any evidence of Iran being behind insurgents in Iraq or Lebanon for that matter. Thats other than White House hacks claiming it as being so.

nacho libre

AbusesToilets wrote:

With respect there has been quite a bit done by the Iranians in formenting trouble in Lebanon with Hezbollah and in Iraq,funding insurgents along with Syria etc.
And most likely the European nations would do nothing in the event of an attack on their soil,either against them or another target

I keep forgetting everything that comes from a right- wing source is automatically true even without a semblance of proof. Hearsay is enough if the source fits your worldsview

you seem to have forgotten in 2004 0r 2005 Syria handed over 30 key players who were said to be funding the insurgency from Syria.
Also, according to Iranian intelligence MI5 and the CIA are helping sunni groups based in the South-West of Iran foment trouble.
The Sunday Telegraph more or less confirmed this in an article quoting security sources. Iran will never attack europe unless war is declared on them. This is similar to the canard that an Al-Qaeda cell was operating in Palestine a few years ago.

Frederico

AbusesToilets wrote:

With respect there has been quite a bit done by the Iranians in formenting trouble in Lebanon with Hezbollah and in Iraq,funding insurgents along with Syria etc.
And most likely the European nations would do nothing in the event of an attack on their soil,either against them or another target

Speaking of formenting trouble..

The US are warmongering again..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6080204.stm

lostexpectation

sovtek wrote:

Obviously you aren't aware of what the Spanish government did after the Madrid attack.
Secondly...you got any evidence of Iran being behind insurgents in Iraq or Lebanon for that matter. Thats other than White House hacks claiming it as being so.

what did spain do again?

AbusesToilets

lostexpectation
what did spain do again?

They voted to change their government and subsequently Spain pulled out of Iraq.

Frederico
Speaking of formenting trouble..

The US are warmongering again..

They're performing a military exercise,concentrating on anti-missle engagement and ship interdiction.What's your point?The Iranians performed one a few months back,trumpeting their new anti-ship torpedo.It's nothing more than sabre rattling.Do you not consider the Iranian Presidents repeated calls for the annhilation of Israel and the Jewish people warmongering?
And as for evidence of Iranian involvement in Iraq,here's an article i found in Time after a quick google:http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1093747,00.html
It talks about how Iran trained and deployed insurgents to Iraq.I'm on lunch so don't have time to go into it fully,but i will later

Frederico

AbusesToilets wrote:

They voted to change their government and subsequently Spain pulled out of Iraq.

They're performing a military exercise,concentrating on anti-missle engagement and ship interdiction.What's your point?The Iranians performed one a few months back,trumpeting their new anti-ship torpedo.It's nothing more than sabre rattling.Do you not consider the Iranian Presidents repeated calls for the annhilation of Israel and the Jewish people warmongering?
And as for evidence of Iranian involvement in Iraq,here's an article i found in Time after a quick google:http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1093747,00.html
It talks about how Iran trained and deployed insurgents to Iraq.I'm on lunch so don't have time to go into it fully,but i will later

Of course theres evidence of Iranian involvement in Iraq, they are neighbours! It's quite strange for someone to accept American involvement in Iraq under the most far-fetched circumstances yet somehow be surprised or dismayed by Iran's involvement in Iraq, its next door neighbour.

His repeated calls for annihilation? as opposed to what? Israel who just flattened southern Lebanon? He can sit there and call for the annihilation of Israel all he wants, the likelihood of Israel attacking Iran is FAR higher than Iran ever attacking anyone, ever. As someone pointed out, he's just pulling a Bush on the situation, diverting Iranian public attention from the real social problems in Iran.

Moriarty

It has also been documented that Iranian shaped-charge explosives have been used by insurgents in Iraq. There was a bit of a flap about it around a year ago by British forces iirc. Whether they ended up in the hands of insurgents by direction of the Iranian central government or not was.. less clear.

Frederico

I would be very surprised if Iran was NOT involved in Iraq. I do find it quite strange how sometimes rightwing people seem to become alarmed that somehow Iran may be doing bad things in Iraq.. the irony is beyond comprehension..

sovtek

lostexpectation wrote:

what did spain do again?

They carried out a criminal investigation and arrested/charged/tried based on that investigation.
They even proved an American citizen was innocent of involvement after the FBI tried to frame him.
What they didn't do was invade a country that had absolutely nothing to do with the bombing, nor collectively punish a people for the actions of a few.

AbusesToilets

Frederico wrote:

He can sit there and call for the annihilation of Israel all he wants, the likelihood of Israel attacking Iran is FAR higher than Iran ever attacking anyone, ever.

I would seriously doubt that,given that Israel is a democratic society and would have absolutely nothing to gain from attacking Iran.The assualt on Lebanon was initiated by Hezbollah,an Iranian backed terrorist organisation,most likely to divert international attention away from Iran's nuclear plans and to put pressure on the US government

Frederico

AbusesToilets wrote:

I would seriously doubt that,given that Israel is a democratic society and would have absolutely nothing to gain from attacking Iran.The assualt on Lebanon was initiated by Hezbollah,an Iranian backed terrorist organisation,most likely to divert international attention away from Iran's nuclear plans and to put pressure on the US government

Yes you would seriously doubt Israel attacking Iran, fine, but it's ALOT more likely than Iran ever attacking Israel.. thats my point. Nothing to gain? Israel attacked Iraq to take out a reactor in the eighties.

The Israeli's can do all the kidnapping, murdering, white phosphorus dropping, overflying, resolution breaking, wallbuilding, sanctioning, occupying, terrorising, UN killing, invading it wants, but its okay by us cos its pro West.. you know.. the 'good guys'.

Jimboo_Jones

Moriarty wrote:

It has also been documented that Iranian shaped-charge explosives have been used by insurgents in Iraq. There was a bit of a flap about it around a year ago by British forces iirc. Whether they ended up in the hands of insurgents by direction of the Iranian central government or not was.. less clear.

Humm I seem to remember that the insurgents started to use explosives 'simalar' to the ones that hezbollah uses, and its thought that hezbollah had been taught how to use them off Iran. Kind of a third hand circumstantial sort of evidence at best.

As for what Europe would do if Iran killed a prominent Jewish person? Well I guess it would be a lot more than what they would do to Isreal if they took out a prominent Muslim person in Europe.

But I don't think that the leaders of either of the countries would care to much about Europe that much to be honest.

Manic Moran

Akrasia wrote:

yeah, cause it's the U.N.s fault when Israel bomb them, and it's the U.N.s fault when Hezbollah attack Israel. It's never Israels fault for anything that happens in the middle east

I think you mis-interpreted my comments.

Is not the UN supposed to be the neutral stabilising force which keeps the other two opposing sides in check? Otherwise, what's the point of their being there?

Israel currently flies around over Lebanon. They're not supposed to. So they should be stopped, or persuaded to that it's not in their best interests. Having some way of the UN making life a little riskier for Israeli pilots strikes me as being a good way of doing this. As it stands, the UN's anti-air abilities are negligible.

On the other hand, there's no apparent indication that the UN is taking any action to support the disarming of Hezbullah either.

Which begs the question then: If the UN isn't stopping Israel and Hezbullah, what the hell are they doing there? They can continue not-stopping them from home just as easily.

NTM

AbusesToilets

Frederico wrote:

Yes you would seriously doubt Israel attacking Iran, fine, but it's ALOT more likely than Iran ever attacking Israel.. thats my point. Nothing to gain? Israel attacked Iraq to take out a reactor in the eighties.

Israel attacked the reactor in Iraq because they felt the prospect of an nuclear iraq posed a definitive threat to their existance.And as for the likeyhood of Iran attacking Israel,they already sponsor Hezbollah,providing money and materials.So while they don't directly attack them,they're happy to supply those that do

Húrin

mike65 wrote:

If lets say a cell of Iranian assasins took out a leading Jewish figure in a European state does anyone here think anything would be done in reply or might it be left for Isreal to deal with? ie Europe cops out. I supect so.

Mike.

I doubt it would be left to Israel, because Jewish or not Iranians would have killed a citizen of that country. There wouldn't be military action, but I can imagine sanctions being imposed.

Frederico

AbusesToilets wrote:

Israel attacked the reactor in Iraq because they felt the prospect of an nuclear iraq posed a definitive threat to their existance.And as for the likeyhood of Iran attacking Israel,they already sponsor Hezbollah,providing money and materials.So while they don't directly attack them,they're happy to supply those that do

Then by that logic they could just as easily attack Iran for exactly the same reason.. they have the US as a buffer and in the region to support them straight away..

The Hezbollah situation is more of a proxy war being fought between America/Israel on one side and Syria/Iran on the other..

I think Hezbollah tactics are pretty vile, but the IDF are no better, and I could easily argue they are worse, they certainly seem inflict alot more pain, suffering, terror and death than Hezbollah do.

If I'd a choice to live in Israel or Iran, I'd feel ALOT safer living in Israel to be honest.

Pakistan has lots of nukes (pointed at the world's biggest democracy), they are a jaded military regime, probably housing Bin Laden, and are most certainly (indirectly) exporting fundamentalist islamic terrorism.. now thats a realistic threat.

AbusesToilets

Frederico wrote:

Then by that logic they could just as easily attack Iran for exactly the same reason.. they have the US as a buffer and in the region to support them straight away..

The Israelis and the Iranians bothed viewed the possiblity of an Iraqi nuclear programme as dangerous enough to warant an attack on the Osirak reactor.The Iranians attempted to destroy in 1980 during the Iran/Iraq war,but were unsuccessful.

AbusesToilets

Frederico wrote:

I think Hezbollah tactics are pretty vile, but the IDF are no better, and I could easily argue they are worse, they certainly seem inflict alot more pain, suffering, terror and death than Hezbollah do.

I think the IDf are better,as was seen during the recent engagement.The Israelis made a lot of efforts to minimise civilian casualties,given that Hezbollah were launching missile attacks from heavily built up urban areas

uberpixie

AbusesToilets wrote:

I think the IDf are better,as was seen during the recent engagement.The Israelis made a lot of efforts to minimise civilian casualties,given that Hezbollah were launching missile attacks from heavily built up urban areas

So Israel only dropped all those cluster bombs, hours before the cease fire, to minimise civillian casualites? :-)

(my bollix)

(1) Israel have the bomb as they have lots of neighbours that don't like them, and like having the leverage an atomic bomb gives them over their neighbours.
(they don't want anyone else to have the bomb)

(2) Iran want the bomb to keep Israel from bombing them/attacking them and to stop American trying to invade them.

(Which Amerca will if they have a chance, America/Israel might settle for a good "Shock and awe" bombing campaign in a few months, due to American commitments in Iraq:rolleyes:)

(3) The Leb is a buffer zone for Iran to keep America and Israel busy so they don't invade Iran.

(4) Iran is a direct opponent of the US gaining more control over the middle east, hence them being labled as part of the "axis of evil".

Tis all politics.

Frederico

AbusesToilets wrote:

I think the IDf are better,as was seen during the recent engagement.The Israelis made a lot of efforts to minimise civilian casualties,given that Hezbollah were launching missile attacks from heavily built up urban areas

They told us they were making an effort to minimise casualties, that seemed to be enough for some people, but I believe the reports and pictures and stories told a different story.

Those cluster bombs the Israeli's dropped are still causing 3 to 4 casualties a day, they used white phosphorus, they turned Southern Beirut into rubble, flattened many towns, they put the country back a decade, they killed more children than they killed Hezbollah fighters, didn't really achieve any aims, except prehaps boosting Hezbollah's status as a legimate resistance instead of aggressive terrorists.

It was a dirty dirty war, of course presented to us on a silver media platter, the propaganda came thick and heavy However in this new age of skeptisism people were starting to see through the spin and lies. The Hezbollah with all their might caused a few dozen Israeli casualties, whereas the IDF with as much apparent restraint as possible killed over 1000 civilians, and nowhere near that number of Hezbollah fighters.

nacho libre

AbusesToilets wrote:

I think the IDf are better,as was seen during the recent engagement.The Israelis made a lot of efforts to minimise civilian casualties,given that Hezbollah were launching missile attacks from heavily built up urban areas

you seem to be more informed than an IDF solider who described fighting Hezbollah. His account of fighting Hezbollah differs from yours. Also, If they were making great efforts to minimise casualties why drop so many cluster bombers in civilian aeras. You will have noticed there is a U.S. investigation into this.

http://hotzone.yahoo.com/b/hotzone/blogs8398

nacho libre

lostexpectation wrote:

what did spain do again?

Asnar tried to pin it on ETA

uberpixie

uberpixie wrote:

(2) Iran want the bomb to keep Israel from bombing them/attacking them and to stop American trying to invade them.

Frankly, as far as I'm concerned, if the USA bombed Iran back to the stone age, or otherwise posed some serious challenge to that nut Ahmadinejad, it would go some way towards the redemption of Bush...as long as he tried to minimise civilian casualties etc. etc.