WWIII

[youyou]

And as for Israel and Iran...
Well listen when you have a madman like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as the president of Iran that despises the jews and wants to anihilate Israel and every jew, trying to build a nuclear weapon to threaten the very survival of Israel then I underline the fact that Israel has every single right to take action against him.

[ganeil]

Originally Posted by youyou

And as for Israel and and Iran...
Well listen when you have a madman like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as the president of Iran that despises the jews and wants to anihilate Israel and every jew, trying to build a nuclear weapon to threaten the very survival of Israel then I underline the fact that Israel has every single right to take action against him.

Well said youyou!

[ehhhwik]

Israel defending themselves when they are being attacked is right, but Israel bombing the sh*t out of Lebanese cities and buildings and killing innocent civilians is wrong! The fact of the matter is, when Israel is provoked every time, they retaliate with very large force and hit extremely hard.

I think warfare between Israel and Iran is very unlikely, Iran will usually use its normal tactics of funding extremist groups in near by countries to provoke Israel, unless of course Israel decides to act first and attack Iran's nuke facilities, which is also unlikely because Israel never attacks first because USA will be against such actions and countries like China will not support Iran to strike Israel because of its demand of oil from the region and from Iran

[Iguy]

Religious war, I think...........wait.........carry on I'll pass!

[youyou]

Originally Posted by ehhhwik

Israel defending themselves when they are being attacked is right, but Israel bombing the sh*t out of Lebanese cities and buildings and killing innocent civilians is wrong! The fact of the matter is, when Israel is provoked every time, they retaliate with very large force and hit extremely hard.

I think warfare between Israel and Iran is very unlikely, Iran will usually use its normal tactics of funding extremist groups in near by countries to provoke Israel, unless of course Israel decides to act first and attack Iran's nuke facilities, which is also unlikely because Israel never attacks first because USA will be against such actions and countries like China will not support Iran to strike Israel because of its demand of oil from the region and from Iran

Wait what do you call Lebanese Terrorists coming into Israel illegaly and kidnapping 6 soldiers and then slaughtering them??
I consider that as being attacked...
And when the Lebanese government supports these terrorists and they are part of the country's leasership then Lebanon as a country is responsible.
I don't condone the killing of innocent people and Israel does everything in it's power to not kill innocent people but hey enough is enough!!!

[dr335is]

Originally Posted by youyou

And as for Israel and Iran...
Well listen when you have a madman like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as the president of Iran that despises the jews and wants to anihilate Israel and every jew, trying to build a nuclear weapon to threaten the very survival of Israel then I underline the fact that Israel has every single right to take action against him.

ahmmm...FOX, CNN...what else have you heard there???
And Sharon was not a "mad man"???
And W is all right???

Israel can take any action against Iran if they want, but leave us outside of that!!! And we will see the outcome...

[dr335is]

Originally Posted by youyou

and Israel does everything in it's power to not kill innocent people but hey enough is enough!!!

and what do we know about it actually???
I'll give you an example:
Yugoslavia war in 1999 (Kosovo thing). USA has requested to use Bulgarian airspace so that they can attack the very eastern parts of Serbia without flying over the whole territory. Bulgaria at first did not allow that. A "stray" accidental rocket hit the outskirts of Sofia (100 miles from the war zone) and injured the family of 4. Next day, the Bulgarian airspace was open for use...

China was complaining about the war in Yugoslavia. The USA sent tomahawks straight to the Chinese embassy in the very city of Belgrade (3 mil. people). And let me tell you something you could not hear on FOX or CNN -- I lived in Belgrade for 19 years. There was ABSOLUTELY nothing at that spot before Chinese embassy was built a few years before the attacks. The US claimed they used the old maps and by mistake killed 7 Chinese citizens...

Wars are dirty, politics is dirty. Don't tell me Israel is doing everything not to harm Lebanese or vice versa...that is a pure BS!

[Driv3r]

Originally Posted by youyou

And as for Israel and Iran...
Well listen when you have a madman like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as the president of Iran that despises the jews and wants to anihilate Israel and every jew, trying to build a nuclear weapon to threaten the very survival of Israel then I underline the fact that Israel has every single right to take action against him.

Wait, was it you that was calling Dr325 an idiot? lets not be too quick to judge now...If you really want to know, PLEAASE just read articles from OTHER sources, not just US media, they are extremly biased and i can get into an endless discussion why.....either way, read this article please..This is as we know may seem absurd.

E-Mail This Post/Page Print This Post/Page

media_lies.jpgIran’s President Did Not Say “Israel must be wiped off the map”
by Arash Norouzi

A introductory commentary by David Duke–
As America gets closer and closer to a catastrophic war with Iran, the justification for proposing this insane war for Israel is that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said that he will “wipe Israel off the map.” This colossal lie is combined with the lie that Iran is developing nuclear weapons. The implication is that unless Israel, the United States, or both attack Iran — that Iran will use nuclear weapons to create a “Holocaust” against the Jewish people of Israel.

First, as these excerpts from Arash Norouzi show clearly, the Iranian president said no such thing. He said he believed there would be regime change in Israel just as he specifically referred to the fact there was regime change in the Soviet Union. Obviously the people of Russia were not genocided by the regime change, they were liberated by it! Furthermore, he did not threaten that he would attack Israel or that he would make this regime change, he simply said he believed that a the Zionist regime would be ended. In a speech I heard in his presence in Tehran, the President was again quoted as saying he would “wipe Israel off the map.” That too was another big lie. In actual fact, he said once more that he believed the Zionist regime would fall as the Soviet Regime did in Russia. He specifically said that the civil and human rights of both Jews and Palestinians must be protected. In addition, on the matter of nuclear energy the Iranian President has repeatedly stated that his government will not pursue nuclear weapons. Iran has been a member of the UN covenants on nuclear energy and has allowed inspections of its facilities to show that it makes peaceful use of nuclear power generation. The head of the UN inspectors has also said he has seen no evidence of Iran having a nuclear weapons program.

The world is in the middle of a Jewish extremist media campaign of lies and hate against Iran and its President. The false translation of wiping Israel off the map has been repeated in literally thousands of articles and media statements and is used every day to justify an Israeli-induced American attack against Iran. The same Jewish extremists who got us involved in the catastrophic American war for Israel in Iraq now seek to get us involved in an even bigger disaster in Iran. If they will be succeed in starting this war it will lead to an American and a world economic depression. It will the fires of terrorism beyond anything that we have ever known. We must do everything we possibly can to prevent this coming apocalypse

Just as in the Iraq War they are using lies, lies and more lies to do it.

Iran’s President Did Not Say “Israel must be wiped off the map”

Across the world, a dangerous rumor has spread that could have catastrophic implications. According to legend, Iran’s President has threatened to destroy Israel, or, to quote the misquote, “Israel must be wiped off the map”. Contrary to popular belief, this statement was never made, as this article will prove.

BACKGROUND:

On Tuesday, October 25th, 2005 at the Ministry of Interior conference hall in Tehran, newly elected Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad delivered a speech at a program, reportedly attended by thousands, titled “The World Without Zionism”. Large posters surrounding him displayed this title prominently in English, obviously for the benefit of the international press. Below the poster’s title was a slick graphic depicting an hour glass containing planet Earth at its top. Two small round orbs representing the United States and Israel are shown falling through the hour glass’ narrow neck and crashing to the bottom.
Before we get to the infamous remark, it’s important to note that the “quote” in question was itself a quote— they are the words of the late Ayatollah Khomeini, the father of the Islamic Revolution. Although he quoted Khomeini to affirm his own position on Zionism, the actual words belong to Khomeini and not Ahmadinejad. Thus, Ahmadinejad has essentially been credited (or blamed) for a quote that is not only unoriginal, but represents a viewpoint already in place well before he ever took office.

THE ACTUAL QUOTE:

So what did Ahmadinejad actually say? To quote his exact words in farsi: “Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad.”

That passage will mean nothing to most people, but one word might ring a bell: rezhim-e. It is the word “Regime”, pronounced just like the English word with an extra “eh” sound at the end. Ahmadinejad did not refer to Israel the country or Israel the land mass, but the Israeli regime. This is a vastly significant distinction, as one cannot wipe a regime off the map. Ahmadinejad does not even refer to Israel by name, he instead uses the specific phrase “rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods” (regime occupying Jerusalem).

So this raises the question.. what exactly did he want “wiped from the map”? The answer is: nothing. That’s because the word “map” was never used. The Persian word for map, “nagsheh”, is not contained anywhere in his original farsi quote, or, for that matter, anywhere in his entire speech. Nor was the western phrase “wipe out” ever said. Yet we are led to believe that Iran’s President threatened to “wipe Israel off the map”, despite never having uttered the words “map”, “wipe out” or even “Israel”.

THE PROOF:

The full quote translated directly to English:

“The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time”.

Word by word translation:

Imam (Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e (occupying) qods (Jerusalem) bayad (must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page of time) mahv shavad (vanish from).

Here is the full transcript of the speech in farsi, archived on Ahmadinejad’s web site
http://www.president.ir/farsi/ahmadi...4sahyonizm.htm

THE SPEECH AND CONTEXT:

While the false “wiped off the map” extract has been repeated infinitely without verification, Ahmadinejad’s actual speech itself has been almost entirely ignored. Given the importance placed on the “map” comment, it would be sensible to present his words in their full context to get a fuller understanding of his position. In fact, by looking at the entire speech, there is a clear, logical trajectory leading up to his call for a “world without Zionism”. One may disagree with his reasoning, but critical appraisals are infeasible without first knowing what that reasoning is.

In his speech, Ahmadinejad declares that Zionism is the West’s apparatus of political oppression against Muslims. He says the “Zionist regime” was imposed on the Islamic world as a strategic bridgehead to ensure domination of the region and its assets. Palestine, he insists, is the frontline of the Islamic world’s struggle with American hegemony, and its fate will have repercussions for the entire Middle East.


Global Research , January 20, 2007
Information Clearing House
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...articleId=4527

[ganeil]

Originally Posted by Driv3r

Wait, was it you that was calling Dr325 an idiot? lets not be too quick to judge now...If you really want to know, PLEAASE just read articles from OTHER sources, not just US media, they are extremly biased and i can get into an endless discussion why.....either way, read this article please..This is as we know may seem absurd.

E-Mail This Post/Page Print This Post/Page

media_lies.jpgIran’s President Did Not Say “Israel must be wiped off the map”
by Arash Norouzi

A introductory commentary by David Duke

You speak of bias and then post commentary by David Duke? Are you at all familiar with Duke?

[ehhhwik]

Originally Posted by dr325i

China was complaining about the war in Yugoslavia. The USA sent tomahawks straight to the Chinese embassy in the very city of Belgrade (3 mil. people). And let me tell you something you could not hear on FOX or CNN -- I lived in Belgrade for 19 years. There was ABSOLUTELY nothing at that spot before Chinese embassy was built a few years before the attacks. The US claimed they used the old maps and by mistake killed 7 Chinese citizens...

Wars are dirty, politics is dirty. Don't tell me Israel is doing everything not to harm Lebanese or vice versa...that is a pure BS!

Yea! I heard about that too! How could such a powerful military machine (US) make such a mistake an attack such an obvious target (Chinese embassy), with all the laser guided missiles and GPS, satellite imaging, etc....?

[Fester]

Originally Posted by Chris.G

There were bombs that even hit the Christian area's of Lebanon
(allocated land). I really can't see why Israel would do this, its absolute BS that a bombs these days can accidently miss there target and hit innocent civilians in these days when technology is very solid. i understand that Israel was trying to get back its 2 soldiers from the militants but taking out so many innocent people is NEVER neccessary.

+1

[ganeil]

Originally Posted by Chris.G

There were bombs that even hit the Christian area's of Lebanon
(allocated land). I really can't see why Israel would do this, its absolute BS that a bombs these days can accidently miss there target and hit innocent civilians in these days when technology is very solid. i understand that Israel was trying to get back its 2 soldiers from the militants but taking out so many innocent people is NEVER neccessary.

If you believe that today's weapons are incapable of error than you have not spent much time around them. Laser guided bombs often lose lock on the beam either because the designator or seeker fails. When that happens, the smart bomb instantly turns into a good old dumb bomb.

Hizbollah intentionally fired their rockets from civilian areas with the civilians as shields, the blame for any civilian deaths falls squarely on them.

[dr335is]

Originally Posted by ganeil

If you believe that today's weapons are incapable of error than you have not spent much time around them. Laser guided bombs often lose lock on the beam either because the designator or seeker fails. When that happens, the smart bomb instantly turns into a good old dumb bomb.

Hizbollah intentionally fired their rockets from civilian areas with the civilians as shields, the blame for any civilian deaths falls squarely on them.

Ah, OK, because the bad guys kill civilians the good ones (presumably by you Israelis and USA) are allowed and expected to do the same???

[dr335is]

by the way, I noticed ganeil has the answer always that does not require a proof or is not clear.

The other questions -- that are obvious (like the bombing of Chinese embassy) are simply ignored.

[UncleWede]

It all comes down to a three-letter word, and all of us on here for BMWs are culprits: O I L.

[ganeil]

Originally Posted by dr325i

Ah, OK, because the bad guys kill civilians the good ones (presumably by you Israelis and USA) are allowed and expected to do the same???

If a bank robber grabs a hostage and fires at the police who return fire and one of the officers shoots the hostage, who is legally responsible for the death of the hostage?

[ganeil]

Originally Posted by dr325i

by the way, I noticed ganeil has the answer always that does not require a proof or is not clear.

The other questions -- that are obvious (like the bombing of Chinese embassy) are simply ignored.

I have no idea why the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade was bombed. I find the official explanation to be weak but I have no first hand knowledge or access to any evidence in the matter so I refrain from commenting on it. Unlike some others, I like to know what I am talking about before I spout off.

[dr335is]

Originally Posted by ganeil

If a bank robber grabs a hostage and fires at the police who return fire and one of the officers shoots the hostage, who is legally responsible for the death of the hostage?

So why don't we just nuke them -- burn it all and start over again. No more casualties for us and the world would see "who the boss is"...

That is a bull analogy.

The robber in your analogy is a bad guy that has done something to us -- by endangering our lives and stealing our money.

Iraq, on the other hand (including Saddam) has never done anything bad to US! So, we definitely have no right of killing Iraqi citizens.

Actually, according to your analogy, I see so called "insurgency" having every right killing our kids over there...

[ganeil]

Originally Posted by dr325i

So why don't we just nuke them -- burn it all and start over again. No more casualties for us and the world would see "who the boss is"...

That is a bull analogy.

The robber in your analogy is a bad guy that has done something to us -- by endangering our lives and stealing our money.

Iraq, on the other hand (including Saddam) has never done anything bad to US! So, we definitely have no right of killing Iraqi citizens.

Actually, according to your analogy, I see so called "insurgency" having every right killing our kids over there...

The analogy was in reference to the Israeli attacks on Lebanon.

[dr335is]

Originally Posted by ganeil

The analogy was in reference to the Israeli attacks on Lebanon.

Please replace Saddam in prentheses with Sheik Hassan Nasrallah and again -- nothing done to us...

Anyway, I was referring to Iraq -- how come we have the right to kill their citizens and then call them a collateral damage?

[ganeil]

Originally Posted by dr325i

Please replace Saddam in prentheses with Sheik Hassan Nasrallah and again -- nothing done to us...

Hezbollah has done nothing to us?

July 19, 1982: The president of the American University in Beirut, Davis S. Dodge, is kidnapped. Hezbollah is believed to be behind this and most of the other 30 Westerners kidnapped over the next ten years.

April 18, 1983: Hezbollah attacks the U.S. embassy in Beirut with a car bomb, killing 63 people, 17 of whom were American citizens.

Oct. 23, 1983: The group attacks U.S. Marine barracks with a truck bomb, killing 241 American military personnel stationed in Beirut as part of a peace-keeping force. A separate attack against the French military compound in Beirut kills 58.

Sept. 20, 1984: The group attacks the U.S. embassy annex in Beirut with a car bomb, killing 2 Americans and 22 others.

March 16, 1984: William F. Buckley, a CIA operative working at the U.S. embassy in Beirut, is kidnapped and later murdered.

April 12, 1984: Hezbollah attacks a restaurant near the U.S. Air Force Base in Torrejon, Spain. The bombing kills eighteen U.S. servicemen and injures 83 people.

Dec. 4, 1984: Hezbollah terrorists hijack a Kuwait Airlines plane. Four passengers are murdered, including two Americans.

June 14, 1985: Hezbollah terrorists hijack TWA flight 847. The hijackers severely beat Passenger Robert Stethem, a U.S. Navy diver, before killing him and dumping his body onto the tarmac at the Beirut airport. Other passengers are held as hostages before being released on June 30.

Feb. 17, 1988: The group kidnaps Col. William Higgins, a U.S. Marine serving with a United Nations truce monitoring group in Lebanon, and later murders him.

Anyway, I was referring to Iraq -- how come we have the right to kill their citizens and then call them a collateral damage?

Do you fail to see the moral distinction between intentionally targeting civilians and the situation where civilians die because of their proximity to a legitimate military target?

[dr335is]

Originally Posted by ganeil

Do you fail to see the moral distinction between intentionally targeting civilians and the situation where civilians die because of their proximity to a legitimate military target?

Actually, if it happened once, twice, 10, 20 people, I would not object.
But 1000 times and thousands of innocent civilians -- hell yes!
Someone should be responsible for that. Or then don't do it if you don't know how to do it properly...