Yet More Tensions in the Middle East?

[dragon wench]

I just saw this heartwarming article in the NYT... *sigh*

So, what do people think? Is this just political posturing and bluster, or is there more to it?

Iran's President Says Israel Must Be 'Wiped Off the Map'
By NAZILA FATHI

TEHRAN, Oct. 26 - Iran's new hard-line president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, told a group of students at an anti-Israel event today that Israel must be "wiped off the map" and that attacks by Palestinians will destroy it, the Iranian student news agency, ISNA, reported.

He was speaking to an audience of about 4,000 student at a program called The World without Zionism, in preparation for an annual anti-Israel demonstration held on the last Friday of the holy month of Ramadan.

His tone was reminiscent of that of the early days of Iran's Islamic revolution in 1979. Iran and Israel have been bitter enemies since then, and anti-Israel slogans are common at rallies.

Senior officials had avoided provocative language over the past decade, but Mr. Ahmadinejad appears to be taking a more confrontational tone.

He said in his remarks today that the issue of a Palestinian state would be resolved only when Palestinians took control of all their lands.

"The establishment of Zionist regime was a move by the world oppressor against the Islamic world," Mr. Ahmadinejad said, the news agency reported. "The skirmishes in the occupied land are part of the war of destiny. The outcome of hundreds of years of war will be defined in Palestinian land."

Referring to comments by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the Islamic revolution, Mr. Admadinejad said, "As the imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map."

The remarks brought swift reaction in Israel and in some Western capitals.

Mark Regev, spokesman for the Israeli Foreign Ministry, said Mr. Ahmadinejad and the Hamas leader, Mahmoud Zahar, "speak openly about destroying the Jewish state ... and it appears the problem with these extremists is that they followed through on their violent declarations with violent actions," The Associated Press reported.

"I think it reconfirms what we have been saying about the regime in Iran," the White House press secretary, Scott McClellan, told reporters in Washington. according to The A.P. "It underscores the concerns we have about Iran's nuclear intentions."

France's foreign minister, Philippe Douste-Blazy, learning of Mr. Admadinejad's comments, said "I condemn them very forcefully," adding that he will summon Iran's ambassador to Paris to ask for an explanation, Agence France-Presse reported.

The tone of Mr. Ahmadinejad's predecessor, Mohammad Khatami, had differed markedly, with Mr. Khatami proposing a dialogue among civilizations and pursuing a policy of détente.

At the funeral of Pope John Paul II in April, Mr. Khatami was seated close to the Israeli president, Moshe Katsav, who said he shook hands with Mr. Khatami and chatted briefly. Mr. Katsav was born in the Iranian city of Yazd, which is Mr. Khatami's home town, and speaks fluent Persian.

However, despite media photos that showed the two men standing next to one another, Mr. Khatami denied the account of the encounter after he returned to Iran.

Mr. Ahmadinejad also called Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip a trick, and said Gaza is part of Palestinian territories and the withdrawal was aimed at convincing the Islamic states to acknowledge Israel.

"Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury," Mr. Ahmadinejad said. Any Islamic leader "who recognizes the Zionist regime means he is acknowledging the surrender and defeat of the Islamic world."

[CM]

The more horrific part to many - is that this opinion is echoed around the Islamic world, both in political classes as well as the poor.

[dragon wench]

It is also this part here that makes me uneasy....

Quote:

The remarks brought swift reaction in Israel and in some Western capitals. Mark Regev, spokesman for the Israeli Foreign Ministry, said Mr. Ahmadinejad and the Hamas leader, Mahmoud Zahar, "speak openly about destroying the Jewish state ... and it appears the problem with these extremists is that they followed through on their violent declarations with violent actions," The Associated Press reported. "I think it reconfirms what we have been saying about the regime in Iran," the White House press secretary, Scott McClellan, told reporters in Washington. according to The A.P. "It underscores the concerns we have about Iran's nuclear intentions."

[Hill-Shatar]

Oh no, they are going off warring again. Can't the defence secretary and the bush admin. restrain themselves once in a while? They have 2000 killed so far in Iraq, are they really going to invade another country?

Even without the interference of the states, however they will pop up, this looks like a statement openly descriminating and attempting to instigate a war between two warring peoples.

Not a good sign indeed.

[CM]

The US doesn't need a reason to go to war. Personally i don't see them going after Iran. They will take Syria out. Once Syria is out they increase influence over Lebanon and limit the power of Hizbollah. Once that is done Iran will be next. This is easily a 20 year plan in the making.

[Dottie]

@Hill: The death toll of iraq is not 2000, its more like 30000 by now.

[Hill-Shatar]

Dottie, I was in fact refering to the militaristic casulaties based already by one ill reasoned campaign. Source is here.

Truly, I do not wish to start on other casulaties, such as civilian, as the numbers would most likely sicken me.

[Dottie]

@Hill: Yes, I realize that, I just think that counting only US soldiers as casualties is a very bad idea. I'm sure you can figure out why.

[Hill-Shatar]

Country Total
Bulgaria 13
Denmark 2
El Salvador 2
Estonia 2
Hungary 1
Italy 27
Kazakhstan 1
Latvia 1
Netherlands 2
Poland 17
Slovakia 3
Spain 11
Thailand 2
Ukraine 18

This is from the above website.

The UK is also listed in all the graphs. This is a US based website, however, I only have time to perform a quick search. Also, considering that the UK and the US have the majority of the casualties, I can see why the numbers on those graphs are larger, while they broke down the other group seperately. Otherwise, the one fatality in Latvia would have multiple empty spaces around it.

Which would significantly decrease the impact of numbers that are listed to the untrained eye, those who do not have to stare at graphs all day, like myself.

Some other sites from varying dates to reference material on the Iraq matter.

http://www.irag.org.uk/eindex.php
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/26/in...civilians.html -this one validates what you said about total deaths

Also, not allied military casualties have also gone above 2000. However, my first remark was more in responce to Allied strength if they decide to go to war again. Also, how many may die, which is why I put in the total, because of utter refusal ro remove a large amount of troops and let the Iraqi government try and prosper wthout dependance on America.

[Dottie]

What I meant was that claiming that the Bush administration have killed 2000 people suggests that what counts is US or allied casualties. While in fact those are rather few compared to the large amount of civilians and Iraqi soldiers who have died.

[Hill-Shatar]

I see.

A simple movement of two people in different directions, then , nothing more. I agree, but considering that this thread is more based on Iran, the results could perhaps be the same. True, you could overlay civilian fatalities instead, which makes much more sense.

My post was however, based around the military, so I thought best to continue my point, while I still agree with yours. The conection was... vague. No offence. So we are in no conflict.

[Nasuke]

then why qoud they say it's only 2000? i know you explained, but i mean, what if it is? really and truly i think it's alot more than just 2000, much more. i mean, how long have we been in this stupid war? three years now? ( i think) how many Iraqis are dying? you know, it's this stuff noone bothers with...and they wont tell the truth.

[Hill-Shatar]

30,000 Iraqi civilians are dead. 2000 Aliied personnel are dead. 2000 Iraqi policemen are dead. As for Iraqi army casualities, I could not find any.

[Phreddie]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill-Shatar 30,000 Iraqi civilians are dead. 2000 Aliied personnel are dead. 2000 Iraqi policemen are dead. As for Iraqi army casualities, I could not find any.

For what I understand there are no true iraqi army casualties, because, most of their personell that die are dead before they are officialy a soldier adn are drafted off as civilains to amke the army not look o bad in fledgling stages and the missions it has gone on were all joint missions withe the U.S. that wer gentle so as not to hurt a reputation that hasnt been established (its all polotics) but im sure i saw sometihng on the news maybe this february-may about a bus full of iraqi soldiers being blown up, maybe it was a bus form the police academy, hmmm.... its odd that the insurgents arenot fighting the army only the police. or atleast that is how it seems at first glance...