or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Is Ahmadinejad the New Hitler?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is Ahmadinejad the New Hitler?

post #1 of 119
Thread Starter 
Many comparisons have been drawn between 2006's Iran and 1938's Nazi Germany. I'm seeing more and more comparisons based on Ahmadinejad's openly calling for Israel's destruction, etc. Most recently, I've seen Baker and Hamilton compared to Neville Chamberlain. That may be going a bit too far, though the idea of approaching Iran and Syria for "help" doesn't exactly sit well with me. It's not in their interests to assist us in any way, nor should we let Iran off the hook with its nuclear program in trade for their "assistance" in Iraq.

I think there are certainly parallels between 2006 and 1938, ones which may result in war. Ahmadinejad, like Hitler, has come out and said exactly what he wants to do. He wants Israel gone just as Hitler blamed Jews for his nations plight. He's fanatical, perhaps moreso than Hitler. Worse, he just may feel that he was put in power to bring about The Apocalypse in the name of extreme Islam. That said, the situation is different. His power has been diminished somewhat after the recent elections. There are major moderate elements in Iranian society as well, those that believe his extremist rhetoric is not helping the country in general.

Now I know there will be those posters here who scream that it's all the MSM's fault for "misinterpreting" Ahmadinejad's remarks. I think that's way off base as his remarks have been repeated in different verbage several times. In addition, he seems all to eager to "discuss" the "myth" of the holocaust. If he doesn't wish to destroy Israel, what does he want to do?

Of course, the real question is what to do about Iran's development of nuclear weapons. Clearly, this man and this regime cannot have nuclear weapons. We must do anything required to prevent that. I'm quite pessimistic about diplomacy working effectively, under any US Administration. You can't negotiate with a man and/or an ideology where a central belief is the duty to bring about the end of the world. I think it's going to come to war, even if it's a massive air operation directed at his nuclear and dual-use sites. Obviously if he attacks Israel....well, then the end of the world is likely upon us.

Your thoughts? Is this a valid historical comparison? Why or why not?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #2 of 119
Someone watched that insipid Zucker video, I see.

There is zero evidence that Ahmadinejad has apocalyptic views at all, and such an idea was already foisted by right-wing kooks (October 19th ring a bell? Millenialists often forget their own failed predictions, but the sane among us remember.) and proven to be nonsense.

The idea that Iran and 1930s Germany are on a military par compared to the rest of the world is a complete joke.

Similarities:
- They are strong, fiery leaders that we do not trust.
- They both dislike Jews (I think it is fair to say on Ahmadinejad's part, definitely Hitler's).
- They are fantastic orators.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #3 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat

Someone watched that insipid Zucker video, I see.

There is zero evidence that Ahmadinejad has apocalyptic views at all, and such an idea was already foisted by right-wing kooks (October 19th ring a bell? Millenialists often forget their own failed predictions, but the sane among us remember.) and proven to be nonsense.

The idea that Iran and 1930s Germany are on a military par compared to the rest of the world is a complete joke.

Similarities:
- They are strong, fiery leaders that we do not trust.
- They both dislike Jews (I think it is fair to say on Ahmadinejad's part, definitely Hitler's).
- They are fantastic orators.

I agree, every time the guy is shown in one on one interviews with western reporters, I hear none of the hyperbolic nonsense fed to us by the politicians. Anyone who knows Farsi care to add to this?

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #4 of 119
Quote:
Is Ahmadinejad the New Hitler?

No, Hitler had a brain.
post #5 of 119
Ahmadinejad is a fundie, meaning he's out of touch with reality, as all fundies tend to be, no matter what the faith. And by disputing (the extent of?) the Holocaust, and apparently invited other Holocaust skeptics to Iran for a conference, he's eliminated any doubts as to that absurd stance. But there's still something that doesn't quite fit in all this... It looks more as if Ahmadinejad is against the concept of Zionism, rather than the Jews as a people/religion; he is on record of referring to "Judaism as a 'noble faith'" and talking about the Jewish people "as my brothers and sisters" in the same speech. This makes little sense when we look at what we are dished up with in the US mainstream re. Ahnadinejad (and lots of other Middle East strories too numerous to go into here).

Then there's is also the issue of translation: virtually everything reaching the West from the Middle East goes through the Middle Eastern Media Research Institute. Are the news items and translations coming out of this agency reliable and accurate? Considering that the founders of MEMRI, Meyrav Wurmser and Yigal Carmon, are both hardline pro-Israel ideologues aligned with Israel's Likud party. Carmon is MEMRI's president; Wurmser left her position as executive director in early 2002 to direct the Center of Middle East Policy at the Hudson Institute. Full article here.

The potential power of inter-language translation as a propaganda tool is immense, and the temptation to (ab)use it is no less. Are the MEMRI folks taking advantage? You bet. Alterations to reality, both subtle and blatant, are without a shadow of doubt an ongoing theme.

Is Ahmadinejad the New Hitler? Only if he starts killing Jews.. and where is the evidence of that?
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #6 of 119
No, the Iranian president, unless that wikipedia entry is wrong, basically cannot unzip his fly [in any significant way] without permission from the Supreme Leader It looks to be a domestic policy sort of role, anything else and he is either watching his step or taking orders.

Quote:
In contrast with most republics, the effective head of Iran's political establishment is not the president, but rather the Supreme Leader, who is a religious figure selected by an Assembly of Experts.

I think the world has been barking up the wrong tree on this one.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #7 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucker

No, Hitler had a brain.

I think that Ahmadinejad is smart enough - what makes you think he is stupid? The biggest thing that made Hitler dangerous was his drug addiction, which made him aggressive and paranoid (he would not have invaded Russia, for example, if he was not wacked out on speed).
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #8 of 119
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

I agree, every time the guy is shown in one on one interviews with western reporters, I hear none of the hyperbolic nonsense fed to us by the politicians. Anyone who knows Farsi care to add to this?

You're kidding, right? It surprises you that the man says different things to the West than to his own people?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #9 of 119
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat

Someone watched that insipid Zucker video, I see.

There is zero evidence that Ahmadinejad has apocalyptic views at all, and such an idea was already foisted by right-wing kooks (October 19th ring a bell? Millenialists often forget their own failed predictions, but the sane among us remember.) and proven to be nonsense.

The idea that Iran and 1930s Germany are on a military par compared to the rest of the world is a complete joke.

Similarities:
- They are strong, fiery leaders that we do not trust.
- They both dislike Jews (I think it is fair to say on Ahmadinejad's part, definitely Hitler's).
- They are fantastic orators.


He has called for Israel's destruction on several ocassions. He is pursuing nuclear weapons. He's a holocaust denier. You mean to tell me it's ridiculous to compare him to Hitler?

Certainly Iran does not yet have the military power as to be compared to Germany. However, acquiring the bomb would change that quick, now wouldn't it?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #10 of 119
I work with a woman from Iran. I'll ask her what's up with this guy.
post #11 of 119
Shameless book plug -- William F. Buckley recommended it a couple months ago in a column. Knowing the Enemy: Jihadist Ideology and the War on Terror, by Mary Habeck, Associate Professor of Strategic Studies at Johns Hopkins.

None of the standard "Evildoers" nonsense -- one of things that she addresses in Jihadi ideology is how "they" see Israel (as well as the UN) as a Western salient. Period. I would throw the 'supreme leader,' who pulls Ahmadinejad's pull string, into that mix. As well as Mr. Personality himself.

Also, Patrick Buchanan weighs in on Man of the Year.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #12 of 119
I'm one of those that believe that "Israel" is a red herring for all of these countries. The leaders blame everything on Israel or "The West" or ... Do you think some out of work Iranian that can't get a government job because he's from the wrong family really thinks Israel is the most import issue facing the world?


Can you say "scapegoat" for government failure?
post #13 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001

He has called for Israel's destruction on several ocassions.

The dissolution of a state is not necessarily analogous to ethnic genocide.

I'm not splitting hairs-- there's just a difference between wanting to erase from the world a group of people and wanting to return a state to the people it was basically stolen from.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001

He is pursuing nuclear weapons.

Guess we're just like Hitler, too!

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001

He's a holocaust denier.

I hear Hitler was a big Holocaust denialist.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001

You mean to tell me it's ridiculous to compare him to Hitler?

I'd say yeah. Basically without merit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001

Certainly Iran does not yet have the military power as to be compared to Germany. However, acquiring the bomb would change that quick, now wouldn't it?

Um.

*Why* would that make Iran in 2006 analogous to post-WWI Germany?

Go on...
post #14 of 119
Zionism. It's not Judaism.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #15 of 119
Ahmadinejad is definitely not a new Hitler. But he can become one, if he successfully dethrones Iran's supreme leader and the experts-assembly and combines all these powers in the president, declares the end of the iranian republic and turns the presidency into a life-long dictatorship, and changes his rhetoric and actions about destroying Israel, into one about destroying Judaism and its followers...

Nightcrawler
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
post #16 of 119
I think people should stop comparing other people to Hitler.....
post #17 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRR View Post

I think people should stop comparing other people to Hitler.....

Yea. Besides godwinning any discussion, it diminishes hitler's evil. not even in the same league. call me when someone invades a sovereign nation, and sets up detention camps.
post #18 of 119
Amy Goodman interviews Scott Ritter-Part1

Amy Goodman interviews Scott Ritter-Part2

"Well, when we say “Supreme Leader,” first of all, most Americans are going to scratch their head and say, “Who?” because, you see, we have a poster boy for demonization out there. His name is Ahmadinejad. He’s the idiot that comes out and says really stupid vile things, such as, “It is the goal of Iran to wipe Israel off the face of the world,” and he makes ridiculous statements about the United States and etc.

And, of course, man, he -- it’s a field day for the American media, for the Western media, because you get all the little sound bites out there, Ahmadinejad, Ahmadinejad, president of Iran. But what people don't understand is, while he can vocalize, his finger is not on any button of power. If you read the Iranian constitution, you’ll see that the president of Iran is almost a figurehead."
post #19 of 119
SDW2001,

I do think it IS a valid comparison for a variety of reasons, many already mentioned.

To everyone,

It is shocking to me that those of you that posted here saying that it's not a valid comparison because Ahmadinejad hasn't implemented his ideas is ridiculous.

The world would be a far different place today if the world had taken Hitler's ideas more seriously in the early '30's.

It is painfully obvious now that if instead of appeasers like Neville Chamberlain, someone like Winston Churchill had dealt with Hitler early on, history could look much different now and millions of people (including some of my wife and my relatives) would have survived WWII.

As one Holocaust survivor answered when asked "What lesson should we should learn from the Holocaust?", he said that "when someone says publicly that they want to kill you, believe them!", meaning act on it before it's too late.


Sammi Jo,

Your comment that Ahmenijad is only 'against zionism, not the jews' is a fundamentally flawed and ultimately a racist, anti-semitic argument. That is because while it sounds inocuous to say that as if you're just against some 'idea' (ie zionism'), not a whole people is ridiculous in this case, as it was the zionist movement that lobbied the British to gain back the historical homeland of the Jewish people. Israel (and even more area than the current borders were historically part of Israel). Therefore, if you are against the idea of zionism, then you're really saying that you're against the idea of a Jewish country. And if you're against the idea of a Jewish homeland then you're really against the concept of the Jewish people existing in the world with a home like any other people and thus it is inherently a racist, genocidal concept.

Would you say that about France, Germany, Italy, etc that the people in those countries don't deserve a homeland??? You'd (or others) I doubt would ever say that, but somehow it has become OK to say that about Israel.

ShawnJ,

Most of what I just addressed to Sammi Jo also could apply to your comments as well.

Shame on you too for your smug, cavalier, racist, and bigoted positions...you probably wouldn't feel the same way if your family was brutally murdered by Hitler and his henchmen.

And yes, you are 'splitting hairs'...Ahmadenijad has said that he wants to wipe 'Israel off the map'. His intentions are to get rid of the Jewish people there, and occupy it with either Iranians and/or other Arabs thus making it a Muslim country and extending 'his empire'.

Israel was NOT stolen from anyone. If anything it was just returned to the Jewish people after having been stolen from them by other countries, from the Romans through the Ottoman Empire.

Also, if you (and most others) really knew your history, you'd know that it was the Arab world that rejected the UN Partition plan in '48 that proposed to create a Jewish homeland called 'Israel' AND an adjacent Arab state for the so-called 'Palestinians'. I say so-called Palestinians as there is no real Palestinian people. The word 'Palestine' is an old Roman name for the area used by the Romans after they conquered it. Actually, 'the Palestinians' were Arab people associated with greater 'Trans-Jordan' and other Arab countries. A

The Arabs rejected the UN plan in '48 as they wanted NO homeland at all for the Jews in the area. So who are really the racists and ones causing the problems in the area???

Not too many years ago, a similar thing happened when Arafat met with then President Clinton and Barak from Israel. Israel agreed to a plan that gave the Palestinians about 95% of what they wanted from Israel. Arafat not only rejected this offer but did not want to do any negotiations. What kind of 'negotiating partner' is that??

Recently, Israel pulled out of Gaza, and the only thing Israel has gotten in return is a daily stream (yes, it is literally daily!) of rockets into it's neighboring communities.

Anyway, the point is that I'm sick and tired of hearing from either racists/anti-semites or just as bad in the end, supposed non-racists/non-anti-semites who don't know the real history of the area either directly attacking Israel's right to exist or indirectly doing the same thing by 'splitting hairs' about whether 'just mentioning eliminating a country from the map' (and thus it's occupants..) is the same as 'wanting to wanting to return a country to some other people'.

Ironically, the arguments used here to dismiss Ahmadinejad's threats on the one hand and yet support his positions are similar to the 'Big Lie' tactics used by the Hitler and the Nazi's. Hmmm... is it just a coincidence that the Arab countries were on the side of Hitler and the Nazi's during WWII and that they have been using this technique as part of their propaganda compaign's since WWII?????

The bottomline is that Israel and the Jewish people have the right just like every other country in the world to exist and to have a homeland and they don't need to justify this all the time to anyone!

Mark
Mark
Silicone Valley Digerati

MacBook C2D 2.0
PMG4/1.3GHz/OSX
Fujitsu T4010 TPC (work)
OQO E2
iPod Touch 16GB (jailborken)
Sony UX90S (sold)
Sharp Zaurus SL-C3200 (sold)
Reply
Mark
Silicone Valley Digerati

MacBook C2D 2.0
PMG4/1.3GHz/OSX
Fujitsu T4010 TPC (work)
OQO E2
iPod Touch 16GB (jailborken)
Sony UX90S (sold)
Sharp Zaurus SL-C3200 (sold)
Reply
post #20 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArchiMark View Post


Israel was NOT stolen from anyone. If anything it was just returned to the Jewish people after having been stolen from them by other countries, from the Romans through the Ottoman Empire.

Get real, they were hardly the first civilization in that area, so they must of stole it from....

I demand we return Israel to the Akkadians.

Infact, if I start a new religion and claim to be a descendant of the Akkadian empire, this land belongs to me and my followers.

And while were on the path of returning land to its rightful owners, I do believe Silicon Valley belongs to the Indians.
post #21 of 119
Don't get me wrong, anyone who willingly invites David Duke to their anti-Israel tea party has a screw loose, but I'm just sayin'...

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #22 of 119
Hey MarcUK, read the 'Old Testament' for starters....


Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcUK View Post

Get real, they were hardly the first civilization in that area, so they must of stole it from....

I demand we return Israel to the Akkadians.

Infact, if I start a new religion and claim to be a descendant of the Akkadian empire, this land belongs to me and my followers.

And while were on the path of returning land to its rightful owners, I do believe Silicon Valley belongs to the Indians.
Mark
Silicone Valley Digerati

MacBook C2D 2.0
PMG4/1.3GHz/OSX
Fujitsu T4010 TPC (work)
OQO E2
iPod Touch 16GB (jailborken)
Sony UX90S (sold)
Sharp Zaurus SL-C3200 (sold)
Reply
Mark
Silicone Valley Digerati

MacBook C2D 2.0
PMG4/1.3GHz/OSX
Fujitsu T4010 TPC (work)
OQO E2
iPod Touch 16GB (jailborken)
Sony UX90S (sold)
Sharp Zaurus SL-C3200 (sold)
Reply
post #23 of 119
Hey MarcUK,

First read the 'Old Testament' for starters....

Second, think you meant "we're" not "were"...

Third, since you're so concerned about land being in the hands of their rightful owners, why don't you start a movement to :

- return England to the Celts,
- return India to the Aryans,
- return France to the Romans or the Franks or maybe the Gauls

Fourth, if you read carefully, my location is 'Silicone Valley' not 'Silicon Valley'....

Fifth, they're not 'Indians' but 'Native-Americans', 'Indians' are from India.....

So think it's you that needs to 'get real'.....


Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcUK View Post

Get real, they were hardly the first civilization in that area, so they must of stole it from....

I demand we return Israel to the Akkadians.

Infact, if I start a new religion and claim to be a descendant of the Akkadian empire, this land belongs to me and my followers.

And while were on the path of returning land to its rightful owners, I do believe Silicon Valley belongs to the Indians.
Mark
Silicone Valley Digerati

MacBook C2D 2.0
PMG4/1.3GHz/OSX
Fujitsu T4010 TPC (work)
OQO E2
iPod Touch 16GB (jailborken)
Sony UX90S (sold)
Sharp Zaurus SL-C3200 (sold)
Reply
Mark
Silicone Valley Digerati

MacBook C2D 2.0
PMG4/1.3GHz/OSX
Fujitsu T4010 TPC (work)
OQO E2
iPod Touch 16GB (jailborken)
Sony UX90S (sold)
Sharp Zaurus SL-C3200 (sold)
Reply
post #24 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArchiMark View Post

Hey MarcUK, read the 'Old Testament' for starters....

hehe, when you've been round here a bit more, you'll probably wish you hadn't said that
post #25 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArchiMark View Post

Hey MarcUK,

Third, since you're so concerned about land being in the hands of their rightful owners, why don't you start a movement to :

- return England to the Celts,
- return India to the Aryans,
- return France to the Romans or the Franks or maybe the Gauls

Isn't this your whole argument?
post #26 of 119
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShawnJ View Post

The dissolution of a state is not necessarily analogous to ethnic genocide.

I'm not splitting hairs-- there's just a difference between wanting to erase from the world a group of people and wanting to return a state to the people it was basically stolen from.



Guess we're just like Hitler, too!



I hear Hitler was a big Holocaust denialist.



I'd say yeah. Basically without merit.



Um.

*Why* would that make Iran in 2006 analogous to post-WWI Germany?

Go on...

1. Right, because no Jews would die if Israel was "wiped off the map." Actually, you ARE splitting hairs.

2. So you think that he can be trusted with nukes? Or, you're saying that there's no difference between the US having nukes and Islamo-fascist having them?

3. Uhhhh.....

4. Why? Your saying that it's not just inappropriate, but ridiculous. I don't think you've supported that position.

5. Because it would alter their military capabilities to a high degree.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #27 of 119
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Amy Goodman interviews Scott Ritter-Part1

Amy Goodman interviews Scott Ritter-Part2

"Well, when we say Supreme Leader, first of all, most Americans are going to scratch their head and say, Who? because, you see, we have a poster boy for demonization out there. His name is Ahmadinejad. Hes the idiot that comes out and says really stupid vile things, such as, It is the goal of Iran to wipe Israel off the face of the world, and he makes ridiculous statements about the United States and etc.

And, of course, man, he -- its a field day for the American media, for the Western media, because you get all the little sound bites out there, Ahmadinejad, Ahmadinejad, president of Iran. But what people don't understand is, while he can vocalize, his finger is not on any button of power. If you read the Iranian constitution, youll see that the president of Iran is almost a figurehead."

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding!

Post extraordinarily biased, liberal crap. Yes, I mean Scott Ritter. Check!

Say Ahmadinejad was mistranslated or make it seem as if it's all the MSM jumping all over it and/or that he has no real power. Check!

By the way, did you even watch the interview? He is either completely deluded or incredibly stupid. "Iran poses no threat."
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #28 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

"Iran poses no threat."

What threat does Iran pose to the U.S. ?

Specifically please.
post #29 of 119
Just to make sure that my point is clear...

My point is that there is an incredible double standard in the media and others when it comes to judging and criticizing Israel.

I have never seen any of those same standards applied to any other country in the world, not that it would make those criticisms of Israel legimate if they were applied to other countries.

In fact, my point in referencing those other countries was to illustrate how ludicrous the argument is that Israel should destroy itself and give itself over to its enemies, when I can think of no other nation that would do that or even consider doing that.

For those of you interested in learning about some other 'interesting bits of history' that are conveniently overlooked by most, read the article in the recent 'New Yorker' magazine that traces the history of the Turkish genocide of the Armenians that took place in the late 19th and early 20th century. It will curl your hair reading about what happened there.

Also, you'll notice the amazing lengths to which Turkey has gone even to today to either deny or diminish what happened to the Armenians has parallels to today and the attempts by Ahmadinejad and others in the Arab world to rewrite history by denying the Holocaust happened and other bizarre twisting of historical events.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AsLan^ View Post

Isn't this your whole argument?
Mark
Silicone Valley Digerati

MacBook C2D 2.0
PMG4/1.3GHz/OSX
Fujitsu T4010 TPC (work)
OQO E2
iPod Touch 16GB (jailborken)
Sony UX90S (sold)
Sharp Zaurus SL-C3200 (sold)
Reply
Mark
Silicone Valley Digerati

MacBook C2D 2.0
PMG4/1.3GHz/OSX
Fujitsu T4010 TPC (work)
OQO E2
iPod Touch 16GB (jailborken)
Sony UX90S (sold)
Sharp Zaurus SL-C3200 (sold)
Reply
post #30 of 119
I disagree with the notion that simply because an ethnic group exists that they are entitled to homeland. This is certainly not the way the world has worked in the past as you yourself have pointed out, what makes Israel so different?

What's with the accusations of racism, bigotry, and antisemitism. Are the Israeli state and Jewish people the same thing? Does one cease to exist without the other?

It seems fairly obvious to me that the reason Iran has beef with Israel is not because of the Jewish people but because of the way the Israeli state has conducted itself in the last 50 years and continues to do so.

You speak of a double standard in the media as if it were a bad thing for Israel, but only Israel gets away with the stuff it does on a regular basis, and its defenders label any who object: racist, bigot, or antisemitic. We had a thread about that a while ago too when the Israeli state was busy murdering a 1000 Lebanese.

The state of Israel does not have any moral high ground to stand on, the IDF's daily conduct in Palestine is despicable and mirrors the exact behavior you and yours claim to be against.
post #31 of 119
Even though it's been a long day, AsLan^, I'm going to respond to all your obvious racist, anti-semitic diatribe below...

Quote:
Originally Posted by AsLan^

I disagree with the notion that simply because an ethnic group exists that they are entitled to homeland. This is certainly not the way the world has worked in the past as you yourself have pointed out, what makes Israel so different?

OK, since you disagree, then let's turn the tables for a minute and see if you still feel the same way....

First, why don't you propose to the UN that Iran should be dissolved and be given to the Syrians. I mean why not, just because the Iranians (ie, Persians..) exists why should they have a homeland, right??

I would have said give Iran to the Kurds as they'd like a homeland, but that would violate your concept you state, wouldn't it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by AsLan^

What's with the accusations of racism, bigotry, and antisemitism. Are the Israeli state and Jewish people the same thing? Does one cease to exist without the other?

This question/concept you raise IS racist and anti-semitic on the face of it as I've stated in previous posts, I can bet you that you would NEVER post a statement like this about any other group, would you?? I say this because I've read a lot and I've never seen anybody say something like this about other groups or peoples...

Quote:
Originally Posted by AsLan^ View Post

It seems fairly obvious to me that the reason Iran has beef with Israel is not because of the Jewish people but because of the way the Israeli state has conducted itself in the last 50 years and continues to do so.

Oh really??? Can you name one specific instance where Israel harmed Iran or the Iranian people....

I know this is probably a hard concept for you to digest, but did it ever occur to you that one of the reasons that Iran and other Arab countries continually criticizes Israel and blames it for many of their problems is that by using Israel as a scapegoat it deflects criticism of the people from critically analyzing why their countries are in such a sorry state??? And thus realizing that it's their own dictatorial leaders that are oppressing them, not Israel.....

Oh and by the way, can you name one Arab country where this kind of open discourse could occur without severe repercussions???

Quote:
Originally Posted by AsLan^

You speak of a double standard in the media as if it were a bad thing for Israel, but only Israel gets away with the stuff it does on a regular basis, and its defenders label any who object: racist, bigot, or antisemitic. We had a thread about that a while ago too when the Israeli state was busy murdering a 1000 Lebanese.

Yes, it is a bad thing for Israel, as the media continually distorts what really happens there.

I don't know what news you're watching or reading, but I sure don't see where it "gets away with stuff" as you put it. Quite the opposite, in fact. If Israel suffers a terrorist attack, rocket attack, etc and then responds in self-defense (which any other country on the planet would do too), then the media presents it as "Israel attacks ...." without explaining that it was in direct response to a specific event that just happened.

As for "the Israeli state was busy murdering a 1000 Lebanese". this is ridiculous and you know it.

What other group besides Arabs are such weanies as to fight by embedding themselves in a civilian population, using woman and children for cover, then fire rockets into another country knowing that it would provoke a self-defense response, and then blame the country defending itself from attack as murderers????

Quote:
Originally Posted by AsLan^

The state of Israel does not have any moral high ground to stand on, the IDF's daily conduct in Palestine is despicable and mirrors the exact behavior you and yours claim to be against.

Yes, it does. Again, your twisting the situation around backwards and you're stating a moral equivalency that does not exist.

The reason that the IDF goes into Palestine is to deal with people who want to commit terrorist acts against the citizens of Israel. They have no other reason to be there.

Believe me, AsLan^, I know this for a fact, that the members of the IDF would MUCH, MUCH rather be at home with their families, working at their jobs, watching TV at night, posting on silly forums like this than dealing with neighbors that, not all, but too many of them are bent on their destruction.
Mark
Silicone Valley Digerati

MacBook C2D 2.0
PMG4/1.3GHz/OSX
Fujitsu T4010 TPC (work)
OQO E2
iPod Touch 16GB (jailborken)
Sony UX90S (sold)
Sharp Zaurus SL-C3200 (sold)
Reply
Mark
Silicone Valley Digerati

MacBook C2D 2.0
PMG4/1.3GHz/OSX
Fujitsu T4010 TPC (work)
OQO E2
iPod Touch 16GB (jailborken)
Sony UX90S (sold)
Sharp Zaurus SL-C3200 (sold)
Reply
post #32 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by AsLan^ View Post

What threat does Iran pose to the U.S. ?

Specifically please.

Now, now. Everyone knows that 9/11 changed everything and that's all you ever have to say to justify warmongering!
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #33 of 119
I guess you're right, Palestine wasn't dissolved and half given to the Jewish people.

I guess I must be a racist if recognizing the difference between the ethnic origin of a people and the sovereignty of a state make one a racist.

I guess it is "ridiculous" that the IDF murdered 1000 Lebanese (and I know it).

Of course sitting children on your HMMWV's is perfectly acceptable, unlike those Arab "weenies", who you know, are civilians, and hide within civilian populations.

You know... it's funny you mentioned the Armenian genocide, then refer to the Palestinian refugees as "neighbors" and wonder why they might be fighting with Israel.
post #34 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Now, now. Everyone knows that 9/11 changed everything and that's all you ever have to say to justify warmongering!

Ah yes, how silly of me. It seems my conditioning is beginning to wear off.

Looks like its off to Room 101 for some quick refresher training
post #35 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001

. Right, because no Jews would die if Israel was "wiped off the map." Actually, you ARE splitting hairs.

If you're reading ethnic genocidal intent into that-- he's gonna have to be a *lot* more explicit to before you can compare him to someone as blatant as Hitler.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001

2. So you think that he can be trusted with nukes? Or, you're saying that there's no difference between the US having nukes and Islamo-fascist having them?

Having or pursuing nukes has absolutely no bearing on a comparison to Hitler.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001

3. Uhhhh.....

Hitler didn't deny the Holocaust. He's freakin' caused it. I don't see how the two are analogous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001

4. Why? Your saying that it's not just inappropriate, but ridiculous. I don't think you've supported that position.

Every one of your analogies just aren't right.

So either you're not quite the best advocate or it's plainly ridiculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001

5. Because it would alter their military capabilities to a high degree.

Oh I see.

So anything that would "alter military capabilities to a high degree" is analogous to Hitler.

Persuasive.
post #36 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by AsLan^ View Post

Ah yes, how silly of me. It seems my conditioning is beginning to wear off.

Looks like its off to Room 101 for some quick refresher training

Indeed, AsLan^! Hie thee to the place of conditioningand don't forget to genuflect when entering the room! Just remember: Zionism = Judaism. Zionism = Judaism. Zionism = Judaism. Lather. Rinse. Repeat. And the 11th commandment: Criticism of the policies of the Israeli government is anti-Semitism.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #37 of 119
The real question should be: Is Iran's supreme leader a new Hitler?

Iran's president Ahmadijenad is not much more than the PR-speaker of Iran's supreme-leader, he has no real executive powers.

That could change though if he managed to change the system.

Nightcrawler
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
post #38 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by AsLan^ View Post

I guess you're right, Palestine wasn't dissolved and half given to the Jewish people.

Finaly an honest answer. You are right, Palestine was not dissolved, as it never existed as a state. As for 'half', no, that is wrong. The largest portion of the Birtish Mandate was used to create TransJordan, a Muslim state. Would you like to dissolve that country as well, or just the Jewish one?

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #39 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightcrawler View Post

Ahmadinejad is definitely not a new Hitler. But he can become one, if he successfully dethrones Iran's supreme leader and the experts-assembly and combines all these powers in the president, declares the end of the iranian republic and turns the presidency into a life-long dictatorship, and changes his rhetoric and actions about destroying Israel, into one about destroying Judaism and its followers...

Nightcrawler

Probably a pretty accurate description. But, prior to Hitlers ascension, who would have thought a 'modern' western country like Germany would allow a single man to assume so much power. Charisma can change the equation dramatically.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #40 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

Finaly an honest answer. You are right, Palestine was not dissolved, as it never existed as a state. As for 'half', no, that is wrong. The largest portion of the Birtish Mandate was used to create TransJordan, a Muslim state. Would you like to dissolve that country as well, or just the Jewish one?

It appears I have misspoken but the point of that sentence was to highlight the double standard between the Jewish people being entitled to their own state and the Arab peoples native to the Palestinian region not so entitled.

I have not advocated the dissolution of Israel, it's just that I don't see why they should have any special rights when compared to other ethnic groups.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Is Ahmadinejad the New Hitler?