Iran in 2006

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

― don weiner (don weiner), Monday, 5 December 2005 20:20 (nineteen years ago)

and what would happen if, when Iran was trying to cobble together their little nuke, if the damn thing exploded and sent a mushroom cloud over Tehran?

― don weiner (don weiner), Monday, 5 December 2005 20:21 (nineteen years ago)

There's also been the continuing wrangle over the new oil minister -- Ahmadinejad's on nominee number four the Majlis keeps telling him to pack sand. (Stuff like that interests me greatly because it undercuts the paranoid Ledeen approach to envisioning the Iranian government as a monolith.)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 5 December 2005 20:24 (nineteen years ago)

and what would happen if, when Iran was trying to cobble together their little nuke, if the damn thing exploded and sent a mushroom cloud over Tehran?

somehow i doubt they'd be "cobbl[ing] together their little nuke" in tehran.

― hstencil (hstencil), Monday, 5 December 2005 20:26 (nineteen years ago)

vacation hot spot

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 5 December 2005 20:27 (nineteen years ago)

right hstencil, but you know what I mean. If a mushroom cloud goes up anywhere in Iran, what happens? Do we suspect incompetence, the CIA, Israel, or does it even matter?

― don weiner (don weiner), Monday, 5 December 2005 20:33 (nineteen years ago)

i dunno, what did you think about that big explosion that happened in north korea, oh, about a year ago or whenever it was, don?

― hstencil (hstencil), Monday, 5 December 2005 20:46 (nineteen years ago)

they sure as shit weren't blaming us for it.

― don weiner (don weiner), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:21 (nineteen years ago)

"they"?

― hstencil (hstencil), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:33 (nineteen years ago)

North Korea.

why is North Korea even related to this thread?

― don weiner (don weiner), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:34 (nineteen years ago)

new nuclear power, big explosion, etc., etc.

― hstencil (hstencil), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:35 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.channel4.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-storypage.jsp?id=1277

Interesting C4 news report. Apparently President Ahmadinejad is more religiously nutty than even some of the supreme council would like.

― Ed (dali), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:49 (nineteen years ago)

شاعر کی کتاب سے شاعری کا انتخاب کیجۓ

it's no "please select the poem you want from the poet's collection?"

― HH, Monday, 5 December 2005 22:22 (nineteen years ago)

oh sorry! what I really wanted to say here was "Crackhead":

Crackhead

― HH, Monday, 5 December 2005 22:52 (nineteen years ago)

That article doesn't give the whole quote, tho it's not surprising that Drudge wants to run with it.

The site in question, Natanz, would take like two years at least to "get up & running," if nothing is done. And ElBaradei was talking about in terms of everybody cooling down, since amping up the rhetoric will do nothing helpful.

Here's the entire article from the Independent.

― kingfish crab trampycakes (kingfish 2.0), Monday, 5 December 2005 23:07 (nineteen years ago)

I'm pretty sure this is my favorite quote from that article, just because I sort of love seeing it print time and time and again:

"Israel has warned that it will not tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran, and has hinted that it would take preemptive action as it did in Iraq when it bombed the Osiraq reactor in 1980. The Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, repeated yesterday that "it's clear we can't have a situation where Iran will become a nuclear power". Iran's President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has publicly called for Israel to be "wiped off the map".

It would appear, then, that Israel is pretty much planning on bombing Iran within two years...I wonder what Chimp will do on that occasion.

― don weiner (don weiner), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 01:52 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,12858,1659498,00.html

http://www.theregister.co.uk/media/664.gif

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 11:25 (nineteen years ago)

rhetoric on both sides. neither of them's actually stupid enough to try and nuke the other. if ahmedinejad becomes much more bellicose i think it's fairly likely that the supreme council will try and remove him.

― barbarian cities (jaybob3005), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 11:41 (nineteen years ago)

Seems that David Irv1ng and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad have more in common than you'd expect http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4527142.stm

― Billy Dods (Billy Dods), Wednesday, 14 December 2005 14:42 (nineteen years ago)

blah, what a fucker.

― hstencil (hstencil), Wednesday, 14 December 2005 16:05 (nineteen years ago)

"If you [Europeans] committed this big crime, then why should the oppressed Palestinian nation pay the price?"

Like it or not (and I don't) these kind of sentiments are widely held across the Middle East. It doesn't make them any less reprehensible. I wonder what exactly Ahmadinejad hopes to achieve by making such comments? Does it bolster his popularity at home? Is he aiming towards explicitly arguing "if Israel have nuclear weapons and the 'international community' doesn't object, why can't we?".

The odds on Israel doing another Osirak-style attack must have shortened considerably. :-(

― stevo (stevo), Wednesday, 14 December 2005 16:36 (nineteen years ago)

It would be amazing if the USA invaded Iran because their President had said these things, but then after invading they could not find any proof that he had actually said them.

― DV (dirtyvicar), Wednesday, 14 December 2005 18:00 (nineteen years ago)

no, it wouldn't. it'd be depressing.

― hstencil (hstencil), Wednesday, 14 December 2005 18:05 (nineteen years ago)

This is the sort of asshole who will likely end up, in a decade or so, ruling the new, improved Iraq.

― M. V. (M.V.), Wednesday, 14 December 2005 18:11 (nineteen years ago)

"If you [Europeans] committed this big crime, then why should the oppressed Palestinian nation pay the price?"

Like it or not (and I don't) these kind of sentiments are widely held across the Middle East. It doesn't make them any less reprehensible.

Explain to me what is 'reprehensible' about that particular quote...

― baked beans (Royal Bed Bouncer), Wednesday, 14 December 2005 18:16 (nineteen years ago)

He's just saying publicly what alot of hardliners have been muttering for years... Iran's a harsh toke.

― andy --, Wednesday, 14 December 2005 18:19 (nineteen years ago)

It was the ‘these kind of sentiments” rather than that particular quote that I find reprehensible. Ahmadinejad was openly questioning whether or not “this big crime”, i.e. the slaughter of millions of Jews by Nazis, ever in fact took place. He is also openly questioning Israel’s very right to exist.

There is an interesting historical argument to be had about rights and wrongs of the UN decision in 1947. I would agree Israel has behaved appallingly towards the Palestinians. But sentiments expressed by Ahmadinejad do NOTHING to bring about a fair and comprehensive peace settlement in Palestine. They are designed to shock and insult and make a volatile political situation even more dangerous.

― stevo (stevo), Wednesday, 14 December 2005 18:51 (nineteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.