ParanoiA Posted November 29, 2006 Posted November 29, 2006 http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/iran_pres_letter.pdf Was wondering if anyone has read this and what they think about it. After a quick read I can say that I see some inconsistencies with his logic and I can't help but to be suspicious. That said, it's an interesting idea at the least. I'm saving any other opinions until I've thought about it more.
GutZ Posted November 29, 2006 Posted November 29, 2006 Is he the same guy talking about decapitiating people and developing a nuclear program?
bob000555 Posted November 29, 2006 Posted November 29, 2006 Sounded like the same bush knocking you see in the mainstream media. Its what Ahmadinejad does when Americans aren’t listening that scares me. I saw on CNBC a movie taken from Al-Jazere(<- sorry woelen I almost certainly spelled that wrong), it was of him giving a speech and encouraging the crowd to chant “death to America death to Israel death to Brittan death to the infidels” and so on (I think they may have even said France ). So really it’s not what he says when he knows where listening but what he says when we’re not that concerns me. All in all it would have been much wiser to invade across the Basra river from the non existent weapons. Is he the same guy talking about decapitiating people and developing a nuclear program? talking and doing.
ParanoiA Posted November 29, 2006 Author Posted November 29, 2006 Sounded like the same bush knocking you see in the mainstream media. Its what Ahmadinejad does when Americans aren’t listening that scares me. I saw on CNBC a movie taken from Al-Jazere(<- sorry woelen I almost certainly spelled that wrong), it was of him giving a speech and encouraging the crowd to chant “death to America death to Israel death to Brittan death to the infidels” and so on (I think they may have even said France ). So really it’s not what he says when he knows where listening but what he says when we’re not that concerns me. All in all it would have been much wiser to invade across the Basra river from the non existent weapons. You really hit the nail on the head. That's exactly what worries me too, and I add myself to that category in that I'm worried about what I haven't heard him say. Some folks, I'm sure, will respond that speakers alter their tone for their crowd - but "death to america, death to Israel..." is a pretty hardcore tone to defend in any audience.
GutZ Posted November 30, 2006 Posted November 30, 2006 Well Wiki has some information on him, pretty "interesting" guy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad ^^*If your interested* It's really hard to comment on that letter, I can't trust sincerity and integrity of pretty much ever national leader these days, those words all could mean nothing. I'll read it again and comment later.
ecoli Posted November 30, 2006 Posted November 30, 2006 I find it funny how he suggests that the the worlds conflicts are ALL caused by the US intervention. Also, he displays a very biased and one sided veiw of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He conveintly fails to make any mention of Palestinian suicide bombers that ensure the continued oppresion of the Palestinian. You'll notice that rockets are being fired into Israel even AFTER Israel declared a cease-fire and pulled all there troops out of Gaza.... but that's probably the fault of the Zionists or the US too.
ParanoiA Posted November 30, 2006 Author Posted November 30, 2006 I find it funny how he suggests that the the worlds conflicts are ALL caused by the US intervention. Also, he displays a very biased and one sided veiw of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He conveintly fails to make any mention of Palestinian suicide bombers that ensure the continued oppresion of the Palestinian. You'll notice that rockets are being fired into Israel even AFTER Israel declared a cease-fire and pulled all there troops out of Gaza.... but that's probably the fault of the Zionists or the US too. I also enjoyed how he codemns the US action in Iraq and calls it a failure, then later refers to the new Iraqi government as a good thing. He also tries to imply that the US, alone, can control the UN in keeping Israel from being punished for their "atrocities" on the palestinians. He refuses to accept the idea that perhaps the countries that makeup the UN just don't agree with him. No, no, it must be the US and their "bully" tactics. He's taking this bully thing and building on it.
Skye Posted November 30, 2006 Posted November 30, 2006 The US has veto in the Security Council so it can stop the SC doing anything. There's a constant game of the Arab state on the SC putting forward a resolution condemning Israel's action and the US vetoing it. This has been going on for decades now. Dipomats got a buzz a while back when the US merely abstained. Oh the drama!
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now