Iranian President makes clear why Iran would be a responsible nuclear power

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
means "ive lost the argument and want to change the subject" ?

You young people know so much more about these emoticon thingies than I do.

The only three countries currently more democratic than Iran in the ME are Israel, Turkey, and for the time being, Iraq.

Their elections, even given the accusations of fraud, are cerainly more powerful than those in the Arab world, and worth more than shams like in our great friend Pakistan.

You have still failed to give any argument other than "they might do something bad". I am sure you will wow all the great thinkers with that little gem....

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


very good, and illustrates one of the problems of IR theory, taking states as monolithic units.

That states are complex units with internal dynamics if anything hurts your "arguement", especially since the individual to make the comments is not even the guy who would have his hands on the button.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


The only three countries currently more democratic than Iran in the ME are Israel, Turkey, and for the time being, Iraq.

Their elections, even given the accusations of fraud, are cerainly more powerful than those in the Arab world, and worth more than shams like in our great friend Pakistan.

You have still failed to give any argument other than "they might do something bad". I am sure you will wow all the great thinkers with that little gem....

Iran has done plenty of very bad things already- they may not make the Gepap outrage meter, but they do for many other people. And i presented a speech made by the President of Iran. Which may not concern you, but evidently does concern the govts of France and Spain.

Im interested in your view that this speech was rogue act. When Khatami did things that the mullahs didnt like, they made their views very clear. I will be interested in seeing the same thing happen again.

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Im interested in your view that this speech was rogue act. When Khatami did things that the mullahs didnt like, they made their views very clear. I will be interested in seeing the same thing happen again.

The speech is basically utterly irrelevant to me. Iran's current regime has a vested interest in keepin Israel isolated. The current moves in the peace process undermine that, so the Iranians get huffing and puffing. That is all they can do new.

I am sure the Mullah's don't mind, the but fact remains that if the Iranians were trully serious about "wipping out Israel", there is so much more they could have done as is. Rhetoric is just that, rhetoric. I don;t care about it until it becomes clear it is part of an actual policy being carried out.

So yes, whatever. People can get huffy and outraged now- fine, whatever. All irrelevant to the question of Iran's nuclear intentions and what policy should be regarding it.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


The speech is basically utterly irrelevant to me. Iran's current regime has a vested interest in keepin Israel isolated.

They seem to be doing a better job of isolating Iran.


"Israel's vice prime minister said Iran should be expelled from the United Nations after its new president said Israel should be "wiped off the map," and Britain summoned an Iranian diplomat Thursday to protest the remarks.


Italy on Thursday also condemned the words of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, telling the Iranian ambassador the comments were "unacceptable" and that they confirm worries over the political positions — and nuclear intentions — of Iran's new leadership.

Shimon Peres, Israel's vice prime minister and a Nobel peace laureate, said it was "impossible to ignore" Ahmadinejad's comments.

"Since the United Nations was established in 1945, there has never been a head of state that is a U.N. member state that publicly called for the elimination of another U.N. member state," Shimon Peres told Israel Radio.

In a speech Wednesday in Tehran, Ahmadinejad said "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 spoke during a conference called "The World without Zionism."

His comments drew widespread international condemnations.

Britain's Foreign Office said Thursday it intended to summon Iran's charge d'affaires to protest Ahmadinejad's remarks, calling them "deeply disturbing and sickening."

Other world governments on Wednesday issued statements criticizing the Iranian's remarks, including Britain, Canada and Germany.

In Madrid, Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos summoned Iran's ambassador to protest Ahmadinejad's comments. French Foreign Minister Jean-Baptiste Mattei also condemned the remarks "with the utmost firmness."

Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev said Israel protested Iran's comments Wednesday at the United Nations but has not decided whether to ask officially for Iran's removal.

[lord of the mark]

Australian Prime Minister John Howard called Ahmadinejad's remarks "dangerous" and said they required a U.N. response, although he wasn't specific.

"To have the president of any country saying another should be wiped off the face of the earth is a reminder of the psychological pressure, quite apart from the actual pressure, that the state of Israel is under, and this obviously is an issue that the United Nations has to address," he said.

The 25 European Union leaders, meeting at Hampton Court Palace near London, also condemned the remarks, saying they "will cause concern about Iran's role in the region and its future intentions."

"Calls for violence, and for the destruction of any state, are manifestly inconsistent with any claim to be a mature and responsible member of the international community," the EU leaders said in a statement.

Relations between the EU and Iran have deteriorated in recent months after negotiations with Tehran failed to get Iran to drop its nuclear program, which the EU and the United States fears is being used to build weapons. Iran says its nuclear program is peaceful.

On Wednesday, White House press secretary Scott McClellan said Ahmadinejad's remarks "serve to underscore our concern as well as the international community's concern about Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons."

European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said the Iranian leader's comments were "completely unacceptable," but when asked whether Iran should be expelled from the U.N., he said: "I will not make any concrete proposal now."

Britain's Foreign Office called Ahmadinejad's comments "deeply disturbing and sickening," and said Iran's charge d'affaires would be summoned later Thursday.

France, Spain and The Netherlands summoned the Iranian ambassadors in their capitals to explain the remarks.

The German Foreign Ministry also called in a representative of the Iranian Embassy to protest the comments, while Italy said the remarks confirmed concerns over Tehran's nuclear program.

"The contents and tone of such unacceptable statements confirm worries over the political positions pursued by the new Iranian leadership, especially concerning the nuclear dossier," the Italian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, on a visit to Israel, criticized the Iranian leader. "I don't agree that anyone should challenge the right of any U.N. member to exist, this is indeed inadmissible," Lavrov said.

But on Wednesday he brushed off Israel's calls for Security Council action, saying the matter is "too serious to be guided by politics."

Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Pierre Pettigrew condemned the comments in a strongly worded statement.

"We are in the 21st century. Canada will never accept such hatred, intolerance and anti-Semitism. Never," the statement said.

[GePap]

Post when an Arab state condemns Iran for these statements. That would actually be of note.

Or for that matter large non-white countries like Indonesia, or India, Pakistan, China, Brazil, Nigeria, whatever.

[lord of the mark]

Latest statement from the Foreign Ministry of Japan on events in the Mideast is the following:

"Statement by the Press Secretary/Director-General for Press and Public Relations, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, on the suicide bombing in Hadera in Central Israel
October 27, 2005

Japan strongly condemns the suicide bombing by a Palestinian extremist which occurred on October 26 in Hadera in central Israel. Terrorism cannot be justified for any reason. Japan expresses its condolences to the bereaved families as well as deepest sympathy for the many who were injured.
This act of terrorism comes at a time when both Israelis and Palestinians are making sincere efforts to achieve peace following the completion of Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and part of the West Bank. Japan is strongly concerned that this incident may have a negative impact on the future development of the peace process.
Japan urges the Palestinian Authority to make its utmost effort to control the extremists. Japan also calls on the Israeli Government to exercise its utmost self-restraint in dealing with this incident. "


I would expect something from them on Iran soon.

Does Japan not count as "non-white"?

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


I would expect something from them on Iran soon.

Does Japan not count as "non-white"?

Yes, but then, you posted nothing relevant to Iran did you?

Typical.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


Yes, but then, you posted nothing relevant to Iran did you?

Typical.

Post one item from a major country indicating support for this speech.

[Imran Siddiqui]

You don't think Arab countries support what Ahmedinejad said, even if they don't openly say it?

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Post one item from a major country indicating support for this speech.

I don't think any other country has a reason to support the speech, not even the Syrians. That of course is utterly, totally, and completely BEYOND IRRELEVANCE to the point you were trying to sort of make. You might like endlessly elongating threads with at best tangetial posts (and please, always make sure to have a link to the source-that would be nice), I don't. Either its part of a point, or it is not.

I am glad it heartens your sensitivities that western states are angry about the speech. Great. The only question that matters is whether it makes any difference in policy for anyone, including the Iranians. Given that criticism for Iran has fallen completely in line with current political alignments, I fail to see anything substantive that will come of this spat.

[Edan]

Originally posted by GePap
Post when an Arab state condemns Iran for these statements. That would actually be of note.

Arab governments maintained silence Thursday over the call by Iran's new president for Israel to be "wiped off the map," but analysts said Tehran's Arab rivals may quietly be pleased to see the radical regime further isolated by its extremism.

Newspapers across the Middle East reported Wednesday's speech by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without comment, many of them on their front pages.

Egyptian Foreign Ministry and Cabinet officials said Cairo would have nothing to say on the address. Egyptian government officials played down the importance of the speech, saying it was intended for a conservative Iranian audience who remained faithful to the thinking behind the 1979 revolution.

Advertisement

With so many conflicts in the Middle East, "the region is in a mess. We really don't need one more," said one official on condition of anonymity, hoping the issue would go away.

Jordanian Deputy Prime Minister Marwan Muasher also declined comment, apparently to avoid further aggravating relations with Iran, which the kingdom has accused of interfering in Iraq to strengthen the Shiite influence in the Middle East.

Analysts and former officials across the Arab world, however, did release criticisms of Ahmadinejad?s speech.

Mohamed Wahby, a former diplomat and member of the Egyptian Council on Foreign Affairs, said it was a mistake to remain quiet about the speech, which he said undermined Mideast peace prospects.

"Recognizing Israel as an integral part of the Middle East is no longer in doubt," he said, saying Iran was only encouraging hard-liners on both sides.

Mustafa Hamarneh, head of the Strategic Studies Center at the University of Jordan, agreed that Amadinejad was out of step, especially with the Palestinians. "He's an ideologue who shot from the cuff; it was not a studied statement," Hamarneh said.

Iran's threatening stance also was counterproductive to its own interests, said Wahby, reinforcing the notion that its nuclear program is aimed at developing weapons despite claims that it is meant exclusively for peaceful power generation.

"Such statement by Tehran will encourage Israel to cling to its nuclear arsenal," Wahby said.

Mustafa Alani, an analyst from the Gulf Research Center in Dubai, said Arab states will see Ahmadinejad's speech as showing up the Iranian regime to be "illogical, irrational."

"The Arab countries have benefited," Alani said. "They will never issue a statement, but they are happy that he proved the Iranians, on the regional level, are not rational.?

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=638606

It's interesting that they rremain silent though - there would have been a time when they would have responded by "upping the ante", so to speak.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap




I don't think any other country has a reason to support the speech, not even the Syrians. That of course is utterly, totally, and completely BEYOND IRRELEVANCE to the point you were trying to sort of make. You might like endlessly elongating threads with at best tangetial posts (and please, always make sure to have a link to the source-that would be nice), I don't. Either its part of a point, or it is not.

I am glad it heartens your sensitivities that western states are angry about the speech. Great. The only question that matters is whether it makes any difference in policy for anyone, including the Iranians. Given that criticism for Iran has fallen completely in line with current political alignments, I fail to see anything substantive that will come of this spat.

If you think that France and Germany were "aligned" against Iran until fairly recently, I want some of what youre smoking.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
You don't think Arab countries support what Ahmedinejad said, even if they don't openly say it?

You think Brazil, India, etc dont share the opinions of France, Canada, and Germany on this, even if they dont openly say it? GePap challenged me for specific statements, so i challenged him back.

Quite frankly I think Pakistan, Turkey, Saudi, Jordan and Egypt have very little use for the regime in Teheran, but for their own reasons wont make a public fuss.