Ahmadinejad's letter to Bush

[savvy]

Pdf here

Text as follows:

Mr George Bush, President of the United States of America
For sometime now I have been thinking, how one can justify the undeniable contradictions that exist in the international arena -- which are being constantly debated, specially in political forums and amongst university students.

Many questions remain unanswered.

These have prompted me to discuss some of the contradictions and questions, in the hopes that it might bring about an opportunity to redress them. Can one be a follower of Jesus Christ (PBUH), the great Messenger of God, Feel obliged to respect human rights, Present liberalism as a civilization model, Announce one’s opposition to the proliferation of nuclear weapons and WMDs, Make “War and Terror� his slogan, And finally, Work towards the establishment of a unified international community – a community which Christ and the virtuous of the Earth will one day govern, But at the same time, Have countries attacked; The lives, reputations and possessions of people destroyed and on the slight chance of the … of a … criminals in a village city, or convoy for example the entire village, city or convey set ablaze.


Or because of the possibility of the existence of WMDs in one country, it is occupied, around one hundred thousand people killed, its water sources, agriculture and industry destroyed, close to 180,000 foreign troops put on the ground, sanctity of private homes of citizens broken, and the country pushed back perhaps fifty years.
At what price? Hundreds of billions of dollars spent from the treasury of one country and certain other countries and tens of thousands of young men and women – as occupation troops – put in harms way, taken away from family and love ones, their hands stained with the blood of others, subjected to so much psychological pressure that everyday some commit suicide ant those returning home suffer depression, become sickly and grapple with all sorts of aliments; while some are killed and their bodies handed of their families.

On the pretext of the existence of WMDs, this great tragedy came to engulf both the peoples of the occupied and the occupying country.

Later it was revealed that no WMDs existed to begin with. Of course Saddam was a murderous dictator. But the war was not waged to topple him, the announced goal of the war was to find and destroy weapons of mass destruction. He was toppled along the way towards another goal, nevertheless the people of the region are happy about it. I point out that throughout the many years of the … war on Iran Saddam was supported by the West.

Mr President, You might know that I am a teacher.

My students ask me how can theses actions be reconciled with the values outlined at the beginning of this letter and duty to the tradition of Jesus Christ (PBUH), the Messenger of peace and forgiveness.

There are prisoners in Guantanamo Bay that have not been tried, have no legal representation, their families cannot see them and are obviously kept in a strange land outside their own country.

There is no international monitoring of their conditions and fate.

No one knows whether they are prisoners, POWs, accused or criminals.

European investigators have confirmed the existence of secret prisons in Europe too.

I could not correlate the abduction of a person, and him or her being kept in secret prisons, with the provisions of any judicial system.

For that matter, I fail to understand how such actions correspond to the values outlined in the beginning of this letter, i.e. the teachings of Jesus Christ (PBUH), human rights and liberal values.

Young people, university students and ordinary people have many questions about the phenomenon of Israel.

I am sure you are familiar with some of them.

Throughout history many countries have been occupied, but I think the establishment of a new country with a new people, is a new phenomenon that is exclusive to our times.

Students are saying that sixty years ago such a country did no exist.

They show old documents and globes and say try as we have, we have not been able to find a country named Israel.

I tell them to study the history of WWI and II.

One of my students told me that during WWII, which more than tens of millions of people perished in, news about the war, was quickly disseminated by the warring parties.

Each touted their victories and the most recent battlefront defeat of the other party.

After the war, they claimed that six million Jews had been killed.

[savvy]

Six million people that were surely related to at least two million families.

Again let us assume that these events are true.

Does that logically translate into the establishment of the state of Israel in the Middle East or support for such a state? How can this phenomenon be rationalised or explained? Mr President, I am sure you know how – and at what cost – Israel was established: - Many thousands were killed in the process.

- Millions of indigenous people were made refugees.

- Hundred of thousands of hectares of farmland, olive plantations, towns and villages were destroyed.

This tragedy is not exclusive to the time of establishment; unfortunately it has been ongoing for sixty years now.

A regime has been established which does not show mercy even to kids, destroys houses while the occupants are still in them, announces beforehand its list and plans to assassinate Palestinian figures and keeps thousands of Palestinians in prison.

Such a phenomenon is unique – or at the very least extremely rare – in recent memory.

Another big question asked by people is why is this regime being supported? Is support for this regime in line with the teachings of Jesus Christ (PBUH) or Moses (PBUH) or liberal values? Or are we to understand that allowing the original inhabitants of these lands – inside and outside Palestine – whether they are Christian, Muslim or Jew, to determine their fate, runs contrary to principles of democracy, human rights and the teachings of prophets? If not, why is there so much opposition to a referendum? The newly elected Palestinian administration recently took office.

All independent observes have confirmed that this government represents the electorate.

Unbelievingly, they have put the elected government under pressure and have advised it to recognise the Israeli regime, abandon the struggle and follow the programs of the previous government.

If the current Palestinian government had run on the above platform, would the Palestinian people have voted for it? Again, can such position taken in opposition to the Palestinian government be reconciled with the values outlined earlier? The people are also saying “why are all UNSC resolutions in condemnation of Israel vetoed?� Mr President, As you are well aware, I live amongst the people and am in constant contact with them -- many people from around the Middle East manage to contact me as well.

They do not have faith in these dubious policies either.

There is evidence that the people of the region are becoming increasingly angry with such policies.

It is not my intention to pose to many questions, but I need to refer to other points as well.

Why is it that any technological and scientific achievement reached in the Middle East regions is translated into and portrayed as a threat to the Zionist regime? Is not scientific R&D one of the basic rights of nations.

You are familiar with history.

Aside from the Middle Ages, in what other point in history has scientific and technical progress been a crime? Can the possibility of scientific achievements being utilised for military purposes be reason enough to oppose science and technology altogether? If such a supposition is true, then all scientific disciplines, including physics, chemistry, mathematics, medicine, engineering, etc. must be opposed.

Lies were told in the Iraqi matter.

What was the result? I have no doubt that telling lies is reprehensible in any culture, and you do not like to be lied to.

Mr President, Don’t Latin Americans have the right to ask, why their elected governments are being opposed and coup leaders supported? Or, why must they constantly be threatened and live in fear? The people of Africa are hardworking, creative and talented.

They can play an important and valuable role in providing for the needs of humanity and contribute to its material and spiritual progress.

Poverty and hardship in large parts of Africa are preventing this from happening.

Don’t they have the right to ask why their enormous wealth – including minerals – is being looted, despite the fact that they need it more than others? Again, do such actions correspond to the teachings of Christ and the tenets of human rights? The brave and faithful people of Iran too have many questions and grievances, including: the coup d’etat of 1953 and the subsequent toppling of the legal government of the day, opposition to the Islamic revolution, transformation of an Embassy into a headquarters supporting, the activities of those opposing the Islamic Republic (many thousands of pages of documents corroborates this claim), support for Saddam in the war waged against Iran, the shooting down of the Iranian passenger plane, freezing the assets of the Iranian nation, increasing threats, anger and displeasure vis-ÃÂ-vis the scientific and nuclear progress of the Iranian nation (just when all Iranians are jubilant and collaborating their country’s progress), and many other grievances that I will not refer to in this letter.

Mr President, September Eleven was a horrendous incident.

The killing of innocents is deplorable and appalling in any part of the world.

Our government immediately declared its disgust with the perpetrators and offered its condolences to the bereaved and expressed its sympathies.

All governments have a duty to protect the lives, property and good standing of their citizens.

Reportedly your government employs extensive security, protection and intelligence systems – and even hunts its opponents abroad.

September eleven was not a simple operation.

Could it be planned and executed without coordination with intelligence and security services – or their extensive infiltration? Of course this is just an educated guess.

Why have the various aspects of the attacks been kept secret? Why are we not told who botched their responsibilities? And, why aren’t those responsible and the guilty parties identified and put on trial? All governments have a duty to provide security and peace of mind for their citizens.

For some years now, the people of your country and neighbours of world trouble spots do not have peace of mind.

[savvy]

After 9.11, instead of healing and tending to the emotional wounds of the survivors and the American people – who had been immensely traumatised by the attacks – some Western media only intensified the climates of fear and insecurity – some constantly talked about the possibility of new terror attacks and kept the people in fear.

Is that service to the American people? Is it possible to calculate the damages incurred from fear and panic? American citizen lived in constant fear of fresh attacks that could come at any moment and in any place.

They felt insecure in the streets, in their place of work and at home.

Who would be happy with this situation? Why was the media, instead of conveying a feeling of security and providing peace of mind, giving rise to a feeling of insecurity? Some believe that the hype paved the way – and was the justification – for an attack on Afghanistan.

Again I need to refer to the role of media.

In media charters, correct dissemination of information and honest reporting of a story are established tenets.

I express my deep regret about the disregard shown by certain Western media for these principles.

The main pretext for an attack on Iraq was the existence of WMDs.

This was repeated incessantly – for the public to, finally, believe – and the ground set for an attack on Iraq.

Will the truth not be lost in a contrive and deceptive climate? Again, if the truth is allowed to be lost, how can that be reconciled with the earlier mentioned values? Is the truth known to the Almighty lost as well? Mr President, In countries around the world, citizens provide for the expenses of governments so that their governments in turn are able to serve them.

The question here is “what has the hundreds of billions of dollars, spent every year to pay for the Iraqi campaign, produced for the citizens?� As your Excellency is aware, in some states of your country, people are living in poverty.

Many thousands are homeless and unemployment is a huge problem.

Of course these problems exist – to a larger or lesser extent – in other countries as well.

With these conditions in mind, can the gargantuan expenses of the campaign – paid from the public treasury – be explained and be consistent with the aforementioned principles? What has been said, are some of the grievances of the people around the world, in our region and in your country.

But my main contention – which I am hoping you will agree to some of it – is: Those in power have specific time in office, and do not rule indefinitely, but their names will be recorded in history and will be constantly judged in the immediate and distant futures.

The people will scrutinize our presidencies.

Did we manage to bring peace, security and prosperity for the people or insecurity and unemployment? Did we intend to establish justice, or just supported especial interest groups, and by forcing many people to live in poverty and hardship, made a few people rich and powerful – thus trading the approval of the people and the Almighty with theirs’? Did we defend the rights of the underprivileged or ignore them? Did we defend the rights of all people around the world or imposed wars on them, interfered illegally in their affairs, established hellish prisons and incarcerated some of them? Did we bring the world peace and security or raised the specter of intimidation and threats? Did we tell the truth to our nation and others around the world or presented an inverted version of it? Were we on the side of people or the occupiers and oppressors? Did our administration set out to promote rational behaviour, logic, ethics, peace, fulfilling obligations, justice, service to the people, prosperity, progress and respect for human dignity or the force of guns.

Intimidation, insecurity, disregard for the people, delaying the progress and excellence of other nations, and trample on people’s rights? And finally, they will judge us on whether we remained true to our oath of office – to serve the people, which is our main task, and the traditions of the prophets – or not? Mr President, How much longer can the world tolerate this situation? Where will this trend lead the world to?

How long must the people of the world pay for the incorrect decisions of some rulers? How much longer will the specter of insecurity – raised from the stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction – hunt the people of the world? How much longer will the blood of the innocent men, women and children be spilled on the streets, and people’s houses destroyed over their heads?

Are you pleased with the current condition of the world? Do you think present policies can continue? If billions of dollars spent on security, military campaigns and troop movement were instead spent on investment and assistance for poor countries, promotion of health, combating different diseases, education and improvement of mental and physical fitness, assistance to the victims of natural disasters, creation of employment opportunities and production, development projects and poverty alleviation, establishment of peace, mediation between disputing states and distinguishing the flames of racial, ethnic and other conflicts were would the world be today? Would not your government, and people be justifiably proud?

Would not your administration’s political and economic standing have been stronger? And I am most sorry to say, would there have been an ever increasing global hatred of the American governments? Mr President, it is not my intention to distress anyone.

If prophet Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Ishmael, Joseph or Jesus Christ (PBUH) were with us today, how would they have judged such behaviour? Will we be given a role to play in the promised world, where justice will become universal and Jesus Christ (PBUH) will be present? Will they even accept us? My basic question is this: Is there no better way to interact with the rest of the world? Today there are hundreds of millions of Christians, hundreds of millions of Moslems and millions of people who follow the teachings of Moses (PBUH).

All divine religions share and respect on word and that is “monotheism� or belief in a single God and no other in the world.

The holy Koran stresses this common word and calls on an followers of divine religions and says: [3.64] Say: O followers of the Book! Come to an equitable proposition between us and you that we shall not serve any but Allah and (that) we shall not associate aught.

With Him and (that) some of us shall not take others for lords besides Allah, but if they turn back, then say: Bear witness that we are Muslims. (The Family of Imran).

[savvy]

Mr President, According to divine verses, we have all been called upon to worship one God and follow the teachings of divine prophets.

“To worship a God which is above all powers in the world and can do all He pleases.

� “The Lord which knows that which is hidden and visible, the past and the future, knows what goes on in the Hearts of His servants and records their deeds.

� “The Lord who is the possessor of the heavens and the earth and all universe is His court� “planning for the universe is done by His hands, and gives His servants the glad tidings of mercy and forgiveness of sins�.

“He is the companion of the oppressed and the enemy of oppressors�.

“He is the Compassionate, the Merciful�.

“He is the recourse of the faithful and guides them towards the light from darkness�.

“He is witness to the actions of His servants�, “He calls on servants to be faithful and do good deeds, and asks them to stay on the path of righteousness and remain steadfast�.

“Calls on servants to heed His prophets and He is a witness to their deeds.

� “A bad ending belongs only to those who have chosen the life of this world and disobey Him and oppress His servants�.

And “A good and eternal paradise belong to those servants who fear His majesty and do not follow their lascivious selves.

� We believe a return to the teachings of the divine prophets is the only road leading to salvations.

I have been told that Your Excellency follows the teachings of Jesus (PBUH), and believes in the divine promise of the rule of the righteous on Earth.

We also believe that Jesus Christ (PBUH) was one of the great prophets of the Almighty.

He has been repeatedly praised in the Koran.

Jesus (PBUH) has been quoted in Koran as well; [19,36] And surely Allah is my Lord and your Lord, therefore serves Him; this is the right path, Marium.

Service to and obedience of the Almighty is the credo of all divine messengers.

The God of all people in Europe, Asia, Africa, America, the Pacific and the rest of the world is one.

He is the Almighty who wants to guide and give dignity to all His servants.

He has given greatness to Humans.

We again read in the Holy Book: “The Almighty God sent His prophets with miracles and clear signs to guide the people and show them divine signs and purity them from sins and pollutions.

And He sent the Book and the balance so that the people display justice and avoid the rebellious.

� All of the above verses can be seen, one way or the other, in the Good Book as well.

Divine prophets have promised: The day will come when all humans will congregate before the court of the Almighty, so that their deeds are examined.

The good will be directed towards Haven and evildoers will meet divine retribution.

I trust both of us believe in such a day, but it will not be easy to calculate the actions of rulers, because we must be answerable to our nations and all others whose lives have been directly or indirectly effected by our actions.

All prophets, speak of peace and tranquillity for man – based on monotheism, justice and respect for human dignity.

Do you not think that if all of us come to believe in and abide by these principles, that is, monotheism, worship of God, justice, respect for the dignity of man, belief in the Last Day, we can overcome the present problems of the world – that are the result of disobedience to the Almighty and the teachings of prophets – and improve our performance? Do you not think that belief in these principles promotes and guarantees peace, friendship and justice? Do you not think that the aforementioned written or unwritten principles are universally respected? Will you not accept this invitation? That is, a genuine return to the teachings of prophets, to monotheism and justice, to preserve human dignity and obedience to the Almighty and His prophets? Mr President, History tells us that repressive and cruel governments do not survive.

God has entrusted the fate of man to them.

The Almighty has not left the universe and humanity to their own devices.

Many things have happened contrary to the wishes and plans of governments.

These tell us that there is a higher power at work and all events are determined by Him.

Can one deny the signs of change in the world today? Is this situation of the world today comparable to that of ten years ago? Changes happen fast and come at a furious pace.

The people of the world are not happy with the status quo and pay little heed to the promises and comments made by a number of influential world leaders.

Many people around the wolrd feel insecure and oppose the spreading of insecurity and war and do not approve of and accept dubious policies.

The people are protesting the increasing gap between the haves and the have-nots and the rich and poor countries.

The people are disgusted with increasing corruption.

The people of many countries are angry about the attacks on their cultural foundations and the disintegration of families.

They are equally dismayed with the fading of care and compassion.

The people of the world have no faith in international organisations, because their rights are not advocated by these organisations.

Liberalism and Western style democracy have not been able to help realize the ideals of humanity.

Today these two concepts have failed.

Those with insight can already hear the sounds of the shattering and fall of the ideology and thoughts of the liberal democratic systems.

We increasingly see that people around the world are flocking towards a main focal point – that is the Almighty God.

Undoubtedly through faith in God and the teachings of the prophets, the people will conquer their problems.

My question for you is: “Do you not want to join them?� Mr President, Whether we like it or not, the world is gravitating towards faith in the Almighty and justice and the will of God will prevail over all things.

Vasalam Ala Man Ataba’al hoda Mahmood Ahmadi-Najad
President of the Islamic Republic of Iran

[KettleWhistle]

As expected, just a load of rhetorical nonsense.

[Ghanbari]

“He is the companion of the oppressed and the enemy of oppressors�.

So he mean that "God is the companion of the kurds and the enemy of the iranian talibans that are ruling Iran" ?

[Mediocrates]

Why is it, diplomatically speaking, that he didn't find an opportunity to apologize for capturing Americans and holding them hostage for 444 days?

[Gershon]

Here's an interesting blog I read recently before the letter was made public. It's by Joshuapundit (http://joshuapundit.blogspot.com/2006/04/time-to-do-mullah-dance.html) a digest and commentary on the war against Jihad.

We have a problem with Iran. What exactly should we do about it?

Here's a dose of reality: there are few options available, and none of them is pretty..simply because the West has let this fester far too long. We now have to pay the price for a number of years of kick-the-can neglect.

One stream of thought out in the ozone opts for diplomacy, or if not actual diplomacy, just a simple acknowledgement that Iran is now part of the `nuclear club' and we will simply have to live with it.

Except we can't afford to.

`Living with it' would be akin to learning to live with a live rattler in the house...except Iran would be more dangerous. For one thing, there's the distinct possibility- I'd say it's almost a certainty - that Iran would provide nukes down line, to the terrorist groups it sponsors and is closely allied with for use against the West. It has said so, as recently as today. (http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=1886705) Such attacks could be very hard to trace back to Iran. By then, it might be too late anyway..and if the fingerprints were the least bit uncertain, would a future US president have the will to do so in the face of massive political opposition and street theater from the Angry Left?

Even worse, in some ways, is the idea that Iran might not use the bomb...but instead would use it as a threat to coerce `respect' from the West, pump up the price of oil and gas and beef up its leadership of the Islamist bloc while fomenting conventional terrorism and Iran based Islamist takeovers. Think the Cartoon Jihad was bad? Wait.

And don't believe the nonsense that Iran is `years away from the bomb'. I give it three years max..provided Iran doesn't already have nukes to play with. (http://joshuapundit.blogspot.com/2006/04/nuclear-project-ahmadinejad-didnt-brag.html)

The Manhattan Project,using much less sophisticated technology only took 4 years.

What lots of people who think a simple diplomatic solution is possible don't consider is that Iran may actually be seeking a confrontation with the West as a 'divine mission'. Notice I said Iran, not Ahmadinejad...important to remember that he's merely a hired hand of the Supreme Council of Guardians and Khameini.

To fully understand what we’re dealing with here, we need to throw out the notion that we’re dealing with a Western mindset, and examine Iran’s theological and psychological makeup.

All streams of Islam believe in a divine saviour, known as the Mahdi, who will appear at the End of Days. Several Islamic demagogues have raised vast armies and taken territory by utilizing this belief through history.

Iran's dominant Shia "Twelver" sect believes this will be Mohammed ibn Hasan, regarded as the 12th Imam, or righteous descendant of the Prophet Mohammad.

He is said to have gone into "seclusion" in the ninth century, at the age of five. His return will be preceded by chaos, war and bloodshed. After a cataclysmic battle with evil and darkness, the Mahdi will lead the world to an era of universal Dar Islam..domination of the world by Islam and Sharia law.

By all accounts Ahmadinejad and the Supreme Council are consumed with devotion to this Hidden Imam, and the belief that Iran's government must prepare the way for his return. Ahmadinejad and the Council appear to be acting on the throes of a religious fervor, a sense of divine mission.

Just take a look at Ahmadinejad's international debut, a speech to the United Nations.

The UN delegates were expecting Ahmadinejad to make nice and take a step towards defusing the nuclear crisis after Teheran restarted its nuclear program in August.

Hoo, were they surprised!

Instead, they heard Ahmadinejad speaking in apocalyptic terms of Iran and Islam struggling against an evil West and ending with the messianic appeal to Allah to "hasten the emergence of your last repository, the Promised One, that perfect and pure human being, the one that will fill this world with justice and peace".

And bring on that wonderful period of Dar-Islam, submission to Islam.Batta bang, batta-bing!

In a video released all over Iran last November, Ahmadinejad is shown telling one of Iran's clerical rulers that he had `felt the hand of God entrancing world leaders' when he spoke to the UN General Assembly. He talked about how the other members of the Iranian delegation had seen an aura of light around him while he spoke to the UN.

"I felt it myself too," Ahmadinejad says in the movie. "I felt that all of a sudden the atmosphere changed there. And for 27-28 minutes all the leaders did not blink…it's not an exaggeration, because I was looking."

"They were astonished, as if a hand held them there and made them sit. It had opened their eyes and ears for the message of the Islamic Republic."

Maybe, after a few minutes of Ahmadinejad, the UN delegates might have been using a skill of mine that never failed to amaze my friends in high school... the art of sleeping with their eyes open. Or perhaps they were shocked into rapt attention...kind of like people watching an approaching train wreck or one of those slo-mo violence scenes Hollywood loves to serve up.

Ahamdinejad followed this performance up with a stream of statements like the ones about Israel being wiped off the map that startled Westerners but are perfectly in tune with the Qu'rannic vision of the return of the Mahdi and the Last Days. In the Qu'ran, on the Day of Judgement the very rocks and trees will call out to Muslims to kill the Jews hiding behind them.

These were not casual references.

Are Ahmadinejad and the Supreme council now pushing for a clash with the West because they feel safe in the belief of the imminent return of the Hidden Imam?

And are they trying to speed up things in the hope of hastening his reappearance?

Let’s look at Iran's recent history and Ahmadinejad’s to get a few more clues, shall we?

During the Iran-Iraq War, the Ayatollah Khomeini imported 500,000 small plastic keys from Taiwan. After Iraq invaded Iran in September 1980 and the Iranians initially suffered military reverses, Khomeini recruited Iranian children, some as young as twelve years old, and sent them to the front. There, they marched across minefields toward the enemy lines in human waves, clearing a path with their bodies. Every one of them had one of those Taiwanese keys hung around his neck…and the children were told that these were their Keys to open Paradise.

No joke.

These children who ran to their deaths in suicide attacks were part of the Basiji, a mass movement created by Khomeini after the Revolution in 1979 and put on the front lines after the war began. The Basij Mostazafan--or "mobilization of the oppressed"--was a volunteer militia, most of whose members hadn't even turned 18 yet. They went by the thousands, willing martyrs for Khomeini and the regime.

Today the slaughter of the Basiji is a source of Iranian legend and national pride...believe it or not. Since the end of the Iraq war in 1988, the Basiji have vastly increased both in numbers and influence, as a cadre of loyal heroes of the Islamic Republic. They’ve been used mostly as religious police to enforce Sharia in Iran, and as Allah's own storm troopers against dissidents. And Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran’s president, served as a Basij instructor during the Iran-Iraq War…and is now the poster boy for the movement. Recruited from the more conservative and impoverished parts of the population (the exact social class Hitler used for the SA), the Basiji swear absolute loyalty to the Supreme Leader Ali Khameini, Khomeini's successor. During Ahmadinejad's run for the presidency in 2005, the millions of Basiji all over Iran got solidly behind Ahmadinejad in every Iranian town, neighborhood, and mosque and pushed his presidency. He was their guy..and the regime's.

Re-examine that little bit of information for a second…the man who trained children to blow themselves up for Allah at the Mullah’s behest is now the country’s president.

Turn it over in your mind.

The inmates have definitely taken over the Persian asylum. And this suicide martyr complex is deeply engraved in the Iranian/Shia psyche.

After all, why be afraid when the Hidden Imam is on his way?

Something else to turn over in your mind is Iran’s perception of how America and the West has reacted to any confrontation or provocation.

In 1979, the Iranians got away with something no other country has ever done, even in wartime. They seized a US embassy and held diplomats hostage for over a year...and the Carter Administration did nothing about it.

This perception has been reinforced since then by our retreats from Beirut after a Hezbollah suicide attack, our failure to deal decisively with Saddam after defeating him in the first Gulf War and continuing through our retreat from Somalia...not to mention our `nuanced' and indecisive response to having 3,000 of our fellow citizens slaughtered while a significant portion of the adherants of the Religion of peace celebrated it as one happening victory for the Great Jihad. And why wouldn't the mullahs feel that way? Until very recently our leaders couldn't even bring themselves to call the enemy by its right name.

[Gershon]

Iran sees us a power in retreat…eager to recoil after any forceful response by the Islamic world. And Iran considers itself the rightful standard bearer of a resurgent Caliphate Islam.

As Amir Taheri has written, the mullahs see Bush as an aberration to the usual Western pattern – a president who can be waited out, while Iran consolidates and upgrades its military, its alliances and its nuclear weaponry.

Diplomacy only works when you are dealing with people that perceive they have something to lose. Although, as I wrote a few months back I wouldn't be surprised to see the Mullahs toy with the diplomacy game (http://joshuapundit.blogspot.com/2006/01/us-russia-china-eu-not-together-on.html) for as long as they can, even anounce some sort of token `joint enrichment' scam with Russia as part of that effort to wait Bush out.

Sanctions and multilateral diplomacy has been and will remain a waste of time.

Aside from the fact that Russia, China and certain members of the EU are unlikely to abide by them, the black market is alive and well, especially when you have oil and gas to sell.

So where's that leave us?

The key to solving this little dilemma is to remember that we're not only dealing with Iran's nukes. We are dealing with Iran as the leader of jihad and the Islamist movement - which is exactly how Iran sees itself.

President Bush touched on this when he compared `Militant Islam' with the communist menace of the Cold War. Except that the mullahs and their pals have a very different mindset in some ways. The communists actually cared about staying alive.

Are we prepared to be half as ruthless and thorough as the mullahs are towards us to preserve our lives and freedom?

`A quick surgical air strike' on Iran's nuclear facilities is possible, but only solves half the problem at best and just postpones things, even if we do manage to destroy most of the hidden, protected and dispersed sites our Russian `friends' have so thoughtfully built for Iran.

And anyone who seriously talks about a land invasion and occupation of Iran is likewise not exactly living in reality. While the US military, perhaps with assists from the Ozzies, the Brits(I haven't totally counted them out just yet, Blair's remarks notwithstanding) and others are more than capable of handling the job, the casualties, money and effort involved would be horrendous...not to mention the political fallout from certain quarters. Remember, we are talking about people that consider `martyrdom' a virtue. And why bother, when we don't need to?

While going after Iran's nukes is definitely important, even more important is attacking the means of their obtaining nukes and financing terrorism in the future, as well as sending a message that jihad against the West is no longer a painless option. Aside from military targets, the most effective strike would be at Iran's ports, navy, pipelines, infrastructure and especially at its oil and gas fields. And we will need to do this in an absolutely thorough and even ruthless fashion.

In short, we need to deal with Iran the way we once dealt with Qadaffi and Libya...but on a larger and much more complete scale.

Once that happens, once the regime is effectively decapitated and its fangs drawn, we can isolate the mullahs and their regime until the whole rotten structure collapses and more moderate forces take control. Or not. That's up to the Iranians.

Not only will we have actually eliminated the nuclear threat by eliminating Iran's cash flow, but we will have struck perhaps a fatal blow at the Great Jihad and Islamic terrorism...and shown its proponents that there is a huge price to pay for attacking the West.

Will it be costly? You bet. We can count on the mullahs seeking revenge and retaliation using whatever's left of Iran's surrogates in Iraq, Europe and throughout the Middle East and Central Asia, so we will have to deploy our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan accordingly and allocate the necessary firepower available to deal with that problem. And we might experience a domestic rise in oil prices, or even rationing until our domestic production ramps up.

But an unchecked Iran results in those scenarios or worse anyway, sooner or later. And less ability to change the situation than we have now. No pain, no gain.

Thanks to our neglect and failure to act decisively for the last 27 odd years, we face a choice between bad and worse options, and the cost of dealing with Iran will increase every year it's postponed. How we deal with Iran and jihad is the challenge we face, just as the west has had to face it before. This is a threshhold moment.

Time to do the mullah dance.

[Mediocrates]

Re: The Manhattan Project.

The Manhattan Project was no doubt the single largest most expensive crash effort on a current dollar basis, the US or any country, ever attempted. Yes they only took 4 years (3 really) but they spent about $2 billion dollars through the end of 1945. The Federal budget in 1945 was $92 billion and the entire US GDP was about $225 billion. In 1996 dollars this represents a $5 billion dollar per device (there were 4 devices, not three) for a total of $20 billion.
http://www.brook.edu/FP/PROJECTS/NUCWCOST/MANHATTN.HTM

[MGB8]

IMO, the best response would not be sanctions. I think that would, in the end, only re-inforce the regime.

The best response would be.....well, mostly nothing. Actually, that's a major overstatement.

The US should first say, without apology, that the moment Iran tests or otherwise obtains a nuclear weapon, it will be subject to immediate NUCLEAR attack. Not just attack, but NUCLEAR attack. While the world would be pissed, and so would Iran and the Muslim nations, what it would do would be to put pressure on Iran from the inside... the people, who DO want to live, now have to face the consequences of a possible nuclear attack. Its a clear line.

Meanwhile, this decompresses the current situation. No sanctions, no nothing. This will reduce the price of oil, which is funding the current Iranian government. The US then needs to do everything in its power to get off oil. The best thing would be massive investment in nuclear energy as well as E85 (via switchgrass, which is close to being perfected and is far more efficient, almost 3x as efficient, as corn). Take the ethenol tarriffs down, too.

This will further reduce oil prices. No oil money... pressure not to get Nukes... Iranian regime will fall... its only a matter of time.

[Ghanbari]

The Best Solution is to equip the oppostion in Iran and let them rise up against the iranian government. And at the same time Amercian and Israeli war planes should attack the iranian military bases, their electric power and their communication. The US should also send thousands of missiles from the navys sorrounding Iran.

The Peshmergas In Iranian Kurdistan could easily liberate Iranian Kurdistan with some air support!

http://images6.theimagehosting.com/iran.cd4.JPG

[1.5 million]

I think that this is a very important letter and it should be analysed and dealt with serioulsy - directly addressed as it were. It reveals much concerning the (fundementalist) Iranian mindset and that of Muslims of the Middle East in general. The claims and positions put forth in the letter need not be true - but you can bet they are believed to be true. We can't just ignore these things. In some cases we must work to counter the falsities and minrepresentations of the beliefs expressed in this letter...we also may have to ultimatly reach some sort of accord/accomodation with them - at least we should make the attempt to consider the possibility of a middle ground...before we again march off to war...before we begin anther set of actions that will irrevocably alter the course of history - and not always in ways that are predictable. As offensive and as contradictory to our perspectives that this letter is in many cases we must realize that a great many (Islamic) folks think this way and see things this way and on a certain level we must deal with this - must work with it. To just ignore it and continue on strictly within our own perspective (ultimatly correct or not as it were) will result in only a contiuation of war, conflict and death. In some ways I think it might be possible to see this letter as a setting out of terms and positions - which can perhaps be worked with - to reach some points of mutual understanding (I didn't say necissarily acceptance of course). I know that most reading this will think I am nuts for expressing this position - but I really do believe - that in the end - you must deal with your adversary - and that some give and take is required and at the very least we need to do more to understand each other better - and perhaps to educate - otherwise i see a very bleak future for us all - and unfortunatly Israel is the point man - the very visible tip of presence (with US in Iraq now joining it of course...) - but unlike the US - protected by at least some distance and 2 oceans - Israel (and its people) is/are vulnerable. Strength of armies will not ultimatly prevent civilian deaths and destruction...and unlike others here - I don't believe that a military attack against Iran is really a viable option (at this time - if ever) - nor will it necissarily bring about the intended results. And who wants to continue to live under these conditions. Changes (in our nature) might be slight over time...but over time we are changed...and not for the better...

[Ghanbari]

and unlike others here - I don't believe that a military attack against Iran is really a viable option (at this time - if ever) - nor will it necissarily bring about the intended results. And who wants to continue to live under these conditions. Changes (in our nature) might be slight over time...but over time we are changed...and not for the better...

70 % of the foreign terrorists in Iraq are from Iran,
If Iran was defeated then Iraq should easily become stabile and more democratic.

It's just a matter of time before Iran have Weapons of Mass Destruction!
What can we do then? Nothing, any strike against Iran then would lead to Iran bombing Israel and other friendly countries.
But I think we can stop that act by acting first and acting now!

[Cellis]

70 % of the foreign terrorists in Iraq are from Iran,
If Iran was defeated then Iraq should easily become stabile and more democratic.

It's just a matter of time before Iran have Weapons of Mass Destruction!
What can we do then? Nothing, any strike against Iran then would lead to Iran bombing Israel and other friendly countries.
But I think we can stop that act by acting first and acting now!
agreed... insurgency get's aid from Iran and it was easy to get from iraqi-irani border. now US forces located on these borders.
but as 1.5million said, it should not be nuking iran... locating forces to the borders can be better solution...

[KettleWhistle]

A millitary attack on Iran is highly unlikely. A nuclear strike is outright delusionary nonsense. Sabotaging a couple of their nuclear fascilities would work just as well. One has to remember that nuclear technology was a huge point of pride for the Soviets until the Chernobyl incident. Ditto the 3 Mile Island incident in the U.S. In all likelyhood, it would be the same for the Iranians.

[ygalg1]

President says his letter to President Bush was invitation to Islam (http://www.irna.ir/en/news/view/line-24/0605110155191821.htm)
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said here Thursday that his letter to President George W. Bush did not concern the nuclear dossier, but rather was an invitation to Islam and the prophets culture.

He made the above remarks in reply to a reporter while attending press conference on his letter to President Bush in Jakarta in the afternoon of the third day of his stay in Jakarta.

Stressing that the letter was beyond the nuclear issue, the chief executive said that in principle, the country's nuclear case is not so significant to make him write a letter about it.


We act according to laws and our activities are quite clear. We are rather intent on solving more fundamental global matters.


The letter was an invitation to monotheism and justice, which are common to all divine prophets. If the call is responded positively, there will be no more problems to be solved,added the president.

The president said that the letter actually contained a clear message of invitation to human beliefs, adding that its response will determine the future.

Concerning Iran's readiness to hold talks with the US, he said that Iran is in favor of dialogues, but it depends on the conditions.


We hold talks with our allies, such as Indonesia, quite smoothly. However those intending to speak to us with authority should attempt to change their attitude,he added.

About the possibility of military attack on Iran, he said that psychological war is quite likely and expressed his doubt about the military option.

In response to a question about suspension of enrichment, the president said that Iran will agree to suspend the process only if all those having access to nuclear fuel will suspend theirs and let their relevant facilities be inspected.


Otherwise, we do not find it necessary to suspend our uranium enrichment and consider the call for it as unfair and will continue to reject it,
In reply to another question whether Iran will need the assistance of other Islamic states in its nuclear issue, he said that the country has the potential to defend itself.


However, given that we do not merely defend our own nation, we wish to feel the presence of our allies, including Indonesia as one of our closest friends, he added.

In response to a question about Indonesia's mediation between Iran and the US, he said that if such dialogue has to take place for the sake of global peace and detente, Iran prefers Indonesia to be one of the negotiators.

[1.5 million]

70 % of the foreign terrorists in Iraq are from Iran,

First of all you have absolutley no way of knowing this..secondly I find the veracity of this claim to be highly unlikely...in fact I imagine the percentage of non-arb insurgents is likely negligible...so perhaps we can speculate that they are Turks and thus justify action against Turkey...I mean as long as we are making up reality to justify aggression...



If Iran was defeated then Iraq should easily become stabile and more democratic.

The fallacies here are to numerous for me to address...and besides - I am laughing to hard...


It's just a matter of time before Iran have Weapons of Mass Destruction!

Yes perhaps it is so...it doesn't take so long for a truck to reach Terhan from Islamabad or Karachi eh?


What can we do then? Nothing,

Perhaps we should take out Ecuador...I mean its only a matter of time - and who knows what mishief they might start...


any strike against Iran then would lead to Iran bombing Israel and other friendly countries.

Do you mean now or in the future? And if Israel is so threatened by (relatively far away) Iranian capabilities then why isn't it concerned about Saudi...or others?


But I think we can stop that act by acting first and acting now!

Yeah like we stopped terrorism by invading Iraq - I hear you...lol...again you are a comedian...

Seriously though - I'm not saying that there isn't a very serious problem going on here - in isolation and as part of this entire "clash of civilisations" (in the Middle East and now the world) and such. And there can be no arguing that Ahmadenajad is at some level a total nut job...and that there are very serious issues regarding the world views of the Iranian Mullahs (and thus government)...I just think that before we advocate killing and war that there are options short of this - beginning with trying to understand one another much better and making the attempt at both education and extending the olive branch - acknowledge that there are real issues that can be discussed and lay out some groud rules...it may not work - but I would postulate that the pain of this approach - in the short and long term - will be much less then indiscriminant military action and stone wall beligerancy. One can argue that Isrtael has suceeded with such an approach...but are we (they) really left with greater (long term) security? Have their victories truely brought peace and security for them? ...or have we just extended the conflict to infinity for future generations to deal with greater horrors than we can yet imagine?

[minusthejihad]

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=20504_An_Islamic_Declaration_of_War&only

An Islamic Declaration of War

Only a few blogs (and almost no mainstream media) have realized the truth about Iranian madman Ahmadinejad’s letter to President Bush. It was not an offer to negotiate, and it was not simply a lunatic’s rant. It was a calculated invitation to convert to Islam, a da’wa�an Islamic requirement (commanded by Mohammed) before waging war against unbelievers.

Speaking in Jakarta, Indonesia, Ahmadinejad himself confirmed this reading today, as reported by the Islamic Republic News Agency: President says his letter to President Bush was invitation to Islam. (Hat tip: Jihad Watch.)


Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said here Thursday that his letter to President George W. Bush did not concern the nuclear dossier, but rather was an invitation to Islam and the prophets culture.

He made the above remarks in reply to a reporter while attending press conference on his letter to President Bush in Jakarta in the afternoon of the third day of his stay in Jakarta. Stressing that the letter was beyond the nuclear issue, the chief executive said that in principle, the country’s nuclear case is not so significant to make him write a letter about it.

“We act according to laws and our activities are quite clear. We are rather intent on solving more fundamental global matters.�

“The letter was an invitation to monotheism and justice, which are common to all divine prophets. If the call is responded positively, there will be no more problems to be solved,� added the president.

The president said that the letter actually contained a clear message of invitation to human beliefs, adding that its response will determine the future.

[minusthejihad]

I've been here for 5 minutes and already I can tell this 1.5 guy is an idiotarian tool.

[Ghanbari]

First of all you have absolutley no way of knowing this..secondly I find the veracity of this claim to be highly unlikely...in fact I imagine the percentage of non-arb insurgents is likely negligible...so perhaps we can speculate that they are Turks and thus justify action against Turkey...I mean as long as we are making up reality to justify aggression...



read this article; http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=7133



The fallacies here are to numerous for me to address...and besides - I am laughing to hard...

http://www.kurdistancorporation.com/images/Iraq-Stability-Map.jpg

The map shows that the majority of the iraqi provinces are relative stable or stable. The three northern provinces (Kurdistan) very stable and democratic! and I think If the shiias in the south would loose their biggest ally (Iran) then they would have to accept a more democratic society in iraq.




Yes perhaps it is so...it doesn't take so long for a truck to reach Terhan from Islamabad or Karachi eh?


Pakistan would never take this risk, Pakistan have had nuclear weapons for a while now but they haven't so far tried to do something like this and if they would CIA or another intelligence agency around the world would know about this!




Perhaps we should take out Ecuador...I mean its only a matter of time - and who knows what mishief they might start...


I wont even comment on that statement since it's so ridiculous.



Do you mean now or in the future? And if Israel is so threatened by (relatively far away) Iranian capabilities then why isn't it concerned about Saudi...or others?


Iran would never bomb Saudi Arabia!
iran is not far away from Israel, their new Shahab missiles can hit Israel and europe.



Yeah like we stopped terrorism by invading Iraq - I hear you...lol...again you are a comedian...

Seriously though - I'm not saying that there isn't a very serious problem going on here - in isolation and as part of this entire "clash of civilisations" (in the Middle East and now the world) and such. And there can be no arguing that Ahmadenajad is at some level a total nut job...and that there are very serious issues regarding the world views of the Iranian Mullahs (and thus government)...I just think that before we advocate killing and war that there are options short of this - beginning with trying to understand one another much better and making the attempt at both education and extending the olive branch - acknowledge that there are real issues that can be discussed and lay out some groud rules...it may not work - but I would postulate that the pain of this approach - in the short and long term - will be much less then indiscriminant military action and stone wall beligerancy. One can argue that Isrtael has suceeded with such an approach...but are we (they) really left with greater (long term) security? Have their victories truely brought peace and security for them? ...or have we just extended the conflict to infinity for future generations to deal with greater horrors than we can yet imagine?

The US made some misstakes in Iraq, they should have split the country in to
3 different states. It would have made it easier for the Americans to control the new states and the terrorists would have been gone much easier!

It's impossible to talk to the iranians, they are not accepting Israel and their goal is to destroy Israel. If they change some of their views then maybe.

[Mediocrates]

This letter was posted by an unknown person named "Fenella" on salon.com regarding an interview they published with Shirin Ebadi

http://www.salon.com/books/int/2006/05/15/ebadi/index.html
Let's make distinctions

One of the posters said the shah was more murderous than the current mullahs. I don't know about the current ones, but the ones that took over after the shah were far more oppressive and violent than he was. The shah's unpopularity was due to his liberalism. He wanted to reform the country and make people more western. He was duly punished for this. The people wanted to return to their religion, and they got what they wanted. The shah targeted groups whom he thought might overthrow him, groups he thought were his enemies. He was perhaps responsible for the death of thousands. The new mullahs targeted anyone who was not islamic enough. After the shah was overthrown millions were killed by the government. No, I'm not saying the shah was perfect. This is always the liberal rejoinder. But he was not as bad as what followed. Revolutions do not always lead to more liberalism. Some times they lead to the opposite.

This article reflects the liberal's dilemma. Liberals are committed to the notion that the US is the worst thing on earth. When they encounter real oppression, they can't condemn it without saying the US is as bad. Saying Bush is like the ruler of Iran is like saying Clinton is like David Duke. They're both white men, both southerners, both claim to know what is best for the country. But are they really "the same"? Hinting that fundamentalism is rising in the US as in muslim countries is nonsense. When was the last time christians rioted because someone converted to a different religion? I know these lies make liberals feel good for some reason. But we all know they are lies. Since we know that they do more harm than good. They don't help the liberal cause (assuming the liberal cause is really liberal, to increase freedom, etc.).

As for the interviewee, she is saying that the people of Iran are miserable but they don't want to be invaded. Fine! There's an old saying that people get the government they deserve. When we look at the US and western europe, we acknowledge that whatever evils exist derive from the culture (and so do the good things). When it comes to non western places, however, we like to think that somehow evil just falls on them and it's always the west's fault. Let the Iranians struggle with their nutty leader (who, if he was a westerner, we would have no hesitation in denouncing as a psychopath). But he does not seem content to bring his misdeeds to Iranians. He wants to spread them. That's how other nations get involved.

-- Fenella

[Ghanbari]

The shah of Iran was almost as bad like the current talibans (mullas) in Iran to the kurdish people! But for some people he was much better, just like the mullas.

[Cellis]

First of all you have absolutley no way of knowing this..secondly I find the veracity of this claim to be highly unlikely...in fact I imagine the percentage of non-arb insurgents is likely negligible...so perhaps we can speculate that they are Turks and thus justify action against Turkey...I mean as long as we are making up reality to justify aggression...

yes, for example i used to be insurgent in Iraq Yo dumb! :D what a jerkish complo theory

[salemon]

please read updated news more (http://hosting-gratis.info/)

[Theodikritis]

This is Ahmadinejads declaration that he will destroy all Americans who do not convert.

Mohhamad himself sent a letter to Flavius Heraclius Augustus ordering him to convert to Islam, however when Heraclius refused Mohhamad declared Jihad against the Empire.

When Mohhamad died his successor carried on the Jihad and slaughtered all countless Christians and Jews who oppossed his conquest.

This is why Ahmadinejad invited Bush to convert to Islam, that is the first step of launching a Jihad (Having an invitation to be among the faithful rejected).

[Roland]

please read updated news more (http://hosting-gratis.info/)
SPAM!!! SPAM!!! SPAM!!! SPAM!!! SPAM!!!