Ahmadinejad: Iran is determined to eradicate Israel

[ProfJohn]

I have changed the thread title because I have been told that quoting a major Israeli newspaper's title is "deliberately and defiantly misleading and false."



Just when we were questioning Ahmadinejad and whether he was just a nice guy with a bad translator along comes this gem. I guess he wanted to make sure his intentions were clear.

And you have to love the guy for this line: "Iran believes that whoever is for humanity should also be for eradicating the Zionist regime (Israel) as symbol of suppression and discrimination,"

Someone should ask him how many of his own citizens he has killed.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that Iran was determined to eradicate Israel, ISNA news agency reported Thursday.

"Iran believes that whoever is for humanity should also be for eradicating the Zionist regime (Israel) as symbol of suppression and discrimination," Ahmadinejad said in an interview with a Lebanese television network, carried by ISNA.

"Iran follows this issue (the eradication of Israel) with determination and decisiveness and will never ever withdraw from this standpoint and policy," the Iranian president added in the interview with the Al-Manar network.

The remarks by Ahmadinejad came one day before the annual anti-Israeli rallies named Qods (Jerusalem) Day, which are held nationwide in Iran on the last Friday of the fasting month of Ramadan.

Ahmadinejad on Monday said that Iranians and Muslim nations worldwide should hold Qods rallies and show their willingness to dispose of this "infectious tumor and this regime full of rascality."

The Iranian president provoked international condemnation in 2005 when he said that Israel should be eliminated from the map of the Middle East and transferred to Europe or North America.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/ahmadinejad-iran-is-determined-to-eradicate-israel-1.380629

Another source
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/World/20110826/iran-mahmoud-ahmadinejad-israel-palestinian-state-110826/

Even in the Terhan Times
http://www.tehrantimes.com/index.ph...estinian-state-not-the-final-step-ahmadinejad

“Do not think that your existence will be recognized with the recognition of the Palestinian state. Be aware that it is only the beginning of the path. You have no place in our region and among our nations, and you will not be able to continue your ignominious life on even a small part of the Palestinian territories.”

Can't wait to see this comment explained away...

Your title, materially untrue as it is, has been restored to this thread.

Perknose
Forum Director

 

[Atreus21]

Just when we were questioning Ahmadinejad and whether he was just a nice guy with a bad translator along comes this gem. I guess he wanted to make sure his intentions were clear.

And you have to love the guy for this line: "Iran believes that whoever is for humanity should also be for eradicating the Zionist regime (Israel) as symbol of suppression and discrimination,"

Someone should ask him how many of his own citizens he has killed.


http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/ahmadinejad-iran-is-determined-to-eradicate-israel-1.380629

Another source
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/World/20110826/iran-mahmoud-ahmadinejad-israel-palestinian-state-110826/

Even in the Terhan Times
http://www.tehrantimes.com/index.ph...estinian-state-not-the-final-step-ahmadinejad

Can't wait to see this comment explained away...

Obviously he must've been mistranslated.

/sargasm...

 

[William Gaatjes]

It has been this way for thousands of years. Iran (Persia) and Israel (Judea) should just solve it on their own. I wonder if it is not just better to let them kill each other off. No support for either side. If they want to go to war with each other, then let them do so. And let the rest of the world move on.

 

[spacejamz]

I am sure Lemon Law and his buddies will be here shortly to clear up this "misunderstanding"...LOL

 

[woolfe9999]

Waiting for one of the usual suspects to claim that Iran's policy of "eradicating" Israel is to be interpreted as entirely non-violent. Any takers?

 

[Jaskalas]

Obviously he must've been mistranslated.

/sargasm...

I'm trying to come to terms with the reasoning of those who fight for that line of thought. Assuming their not traitors loyal to the Iranian regime, is deflecting for them just an excuse to avoid taking action? I imagine it's their means to an end. They don't want us at war with Iran, so they'll go around and promote an Iranian view of cute cuddly teddy bears.

It's just that sort of reasoning chafes me the wrong way. I could handle a reasoned argument based in reality, where we acknowledge the terrorist Kingpin of the Middle East is a religious nutjob. Where we acknowledge their fixation on MAD for the return of their 12th Imam. Where we acknowledge that they WILL have nuclear weapons if we don't do something.

I have respect for someone willing to get down to the grit of why, even with all that considered, we should allow nuclear proliferation.

Yet we cannot even come to terms with what Iran is or what it is doing. Therein lies the problem of any discussion.

 

[soulcougher73]

It has been this way for thousands of years. Iran (Persia) and Israel (Judea) should just solve it on their own. I wonder if it is not just better to let them kill each other off. No support for either side. If they want to go to war with each other, then let them do so. And let the rest of the world move on.

This. Let Isreal wipe Iran off the map and lets move past this nonsense.

 

[Orignal Earl]

I'm confused here.

Your saying that because Ahmadinejad has stated again that the Israeli Regime has got to be eradicated that it shows he really means Jews and their country of Israel?
Why does the author of the piece put (Israel) after the Regime quotes?
Is is asserting that is what Ahmadinejad means?
Isn't that what all the fuss was about last time?

 

[spacejamz]

Here is the thread from a few weeks ago where Frosted Flakes claims Ahmadinejad's statement about wiping Isreal off the map has been debunked..

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2184783

 

[Orignal Earl]

Here is the thread from a few weeks ago where Frosted Flakes claims Ahmadinejad's statement about wiping Isreal off the map has been debunked..

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2184783

Yes I see that and know the story.
Now Ahmadinejad has said the same thing.
How does that prove he means Israel as a country and not the Israeli Gov?

 

[brandonb]

I hope Iran does.

 

[nick1985]

Well, one defend-at-all-costs liberal has arrived

 

[Orignal Earl]

Well, one defend-at-all-costs liberal has arrived

Defend what at all costs?

 

[spacejamz]

Yes I see that and know the story.
Now Ahmadinejad has said the same thing.
How does that prove he means Israel as a country and not the Israeli Gov?

wow...just wow...

 

[Orignal Earl]

wow...just wow...

Can you explain?

 

[chucky2]

It has been this way for thousands of years. Iran (Persia) and Israel (Judea) should just solve it on their own. I wonder if it is not just better to let them kill each other off. No support for either side. If they want to go to war with each other, then let them do so. And let the rest of the world move on.

That happened. Then the western powers decided to pump a bunch of Jews where they weren't wanted, so they didn't have to have them. That couldn't have consequences of course...

 

[spacejamz]

Can you explain?

For those that understand, no explanation is necessary. For those that do not, no explanation is possible.

 

[nick1985]

For those that understand, no explanation is necessary. For those that do not, no explanation is possible.

Pretty much this

 

[Double Trouble]

Uh, he said the regime needs to be eradicated. How is that any different than the US saying some regime of some crappy country needs to be removed ("regime change")? I'm about as anti-islamonut as they get, but I don't see an issue with the statement, at least not the piece I've seen. If there are other parts that are more objectionable, I haven't seen them.

 

[JSt0rm]

Let them kill each other. So what? Keep the oil flowing.

 

[Orignal Earl]

For those that understand, no explanation is necessary. For those that do not, no explanation is possible.

lol alrighty then...

 

[JSt0rm]

Uh, he said the regime needs to be eradicated. How is that any different than the US saying some regime of some crappy country needs to be removed ("regime change")? I'm about as anti-islamonut as they get, but I don't see an issue with the statement, at least not the piece I've seen. If there are other parts that are more objectionable, I haven't seen them.

oh so this is another distorted view brought to you by PJ the biggest fuck in P&N? And he wonders he is treated worst then the funk on the bottom of my made in the usa boot?

 

[nick1985]

oh so this is another distorted view brought to you by PJ the biggest fuck in P&N? And he wonders he is treated worst then the funk on the bottom of my made in the usa boot?

angry liberal

 

[Craig234]

He wants the state of Israel as a Jewish state to end, and for the Palestinians to be restored, is how I read it. The US has wanted a lot of governments to do the same, from the USSR to Qadafi, for decades; it didn't mean we supported 'nuking them' (though some high level officials did).

The guy is an opponent of the state of Israel as it exists, seems fair. That doesn't mean he wants to start a war or kill everyone in Israel.

I'm one of those who wants the type of government in Iran to be replaced; I don't want war with or to kill all Iranians.

He doesn't say anything about wanting nukes to use them on Israel.

The math sort of works out this way it seems: because Europe had the holocaust, it decided to give a price to Jews of a state in the Middle East, displacing some people there, with the region none to happy about this new neighbor, who is now a nuclear-armed leading military power occupying nearby areas.

The world doesn't want Iran to get nuclear weapons because of the risk; though they give Iran a strong reason to want them, seeing as how the US backed the invasion of Iran in the longest war of the 20th century with a million casualties, and showed how little protection the UN charter offers by invading Iraq next door, in part as a 'strategic base' for a possible invasion of Iran. On the other hand, nukes are tolerated for Israel on the idea that without them Israel is at risk.

So, any other arrangement to provide security for Israel without Israel keeping nukes has not been pursued.

Instead, tensions continue - a little like China and Taiwan - between continued opposition to the presence of the state of Israel (or the lesser version of opposing the occupation of nearby areas), versus the determination that Israel be a permanent nation in that location, with military power against the region.

 

[nick1985]

The guy is an opponent of the state of Israel as it exists, seems fair.

lol