"Tom Cooper" wrote in message ...
"robert arndt" wrote in message
om...
(phil hunt) wrote in message
...
On 17 Sep 2003 08:41:16 -0700, robert arndt wrote:

Tehran should be a smoking ruin by now,
[...]
I only live for the day [when I can] watch as Tehran disappears in
a mushroom cloud.

When are you growing the toothbrush mustache, Bob?


Let me get this straight Phil, buddy. You compare me to Hitler

- errm, where has Phil done this?

because
I believe Tehran should be destroyed in the event of an attack against
the State of Israel with IRBMs (which for all we know in the future
might mount an Iranian-made or DPRK/FSU purchased nuclear warhead)...

Has Tehran threatened to attack Israel? Has anybody in Tehran threatened to
attack Dimona? To "burn down" the whole Israel or whatever else?



Not just someone, but rafsanjani himself who still have power in Iran,
has said not long ago that Iran should nuke Israel:

http://www.iran-press-service.com/ar...ats_141201.htm


And if it's not enough that the clergi their is anxious to nuke Israel
then their "reformist" president, khatami was also throwing poison at
Israel when Iran introduced the Shihab 3.

From:
http://www.jpost.com/com/Archive/03....Article-1.html

--
On Saturday, Iranian President Mohammed Khatami said his country was
determined to continue to strengthen its armed forces, regardless of
international concerns.

"A strong Iran is a backing for the security of friends, neighbors and
all the regional countries," Khatami said during a Defense Ministry
exhibition in Teheran.

He condemned "the Zionist regime, which is equipped with atomic,
biological and chemical weapons," as "the principal threat to the
nations of the region."

Jay Bushinsky adds:

Responding to Khatami's remarks, the Foreign Ministry said yesterday
it does not perceive Iran as an enemy and does not threaten the
Iranian regime.
--


Did you notice the difference between Iran's and Israel's approach?


I'm also posting an article from Iranscope:

http://www.iranvajahan.net/english/2...16/index.shtml


Thursday, September 04, 2003

IRI Intimidating Israel

September 04, 2003
Iranscope
Sam Ghandchi



Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) since its inception has been
intimidating Israel, beginning with Khomeini's announcement of the
Ghods Day in Tehran after the establishment of IRI, supposedly to
defend the Palestinian people, but in reality to export Shi'a Islamism
all over the Middle East. In the recent years, IRI boasting of having
long range missiles reaching Israel, is doing the same kind of
rhetoric Saddam initiated against Israel, that ended up in Israel's
preemptive strikes on Iraq's nuclear facilities.

The IRI anti-Israeli intimidations is also reminiscent of rhetoric of
IRI leaders against Iraq which ended up in Iraq's invasion of Iran
with 8 years of suffering and devastation with no positive outcome for
Iran. Of course Saddam's Iraq invaded Iran and it was rightly
condemned and Iranians had every right and duty to resist the invaders
and push them out of Iran.

Why is IRI doing all the rhetoric of Shahab Missiles to get Iran into
a war situation with Israel? Haven't we learned that these
intimidations can only hurt Iran and Iranians by isolating Iran more
and more and putting Iran at the risk of an Israeli attack?

What is all the point of anti-Israeli nonsense? In the last 20 years,
Iran has suffered in the hands of Islamists and not Zionists. Why do
the Islamists and leftists always try to make Israeli-Palestinian
conflict our issue? IRI tries to start a war with Israel to keep
itself afloat, the same way Saddam and many Arab states including most
of the Palestinian leadership have done all these years, to keep the
tension with Israel to justify their own incompetence to form
democratic and modern states in their own countries.

Can anybody name one state in the Middle East to be more modern and
democratic for its *own* citizens than Israel? Oh please do not jump
and say Palestinians are treated as second degree citizens in Israel.
I know that and I condemn it. But blacks were treated as second degree
citizens in law of the land not only till 1864 but even till the Civil
Rights Movement in the U.S., but the United State was still a
democracy for the rest of the population for hundreds of years despite
the ugly part of apartheid during that history.

Let's remember that in contrast, the Arab countries do not just treat
their "second" degree citizens below democratic and human rights
standards, they treat all their citizens as such, and also they are
all backward states which even allow the killing of heretics, or
practice beheading and other cruel punishments like in Saudi Arabia,
and stoning and other crimes against Iran's own citizens in the case
of IRI even sanctioned in its constitution, whereas all these
countries having oil are a lot richer than Israel and could have
modernized and democratized a lot if they had the right leadership.

Israel has been one of the most successful countries in the Middle
East, which has been able to become way more modern and democratic
than all the other countries in the Middle East even without having
oil revenues. The superiority of the state apparatus of Israel in the
independence of its parliament and checks and balances, having real
elections and not sham elections, and the social welfare and
independent media and other human rights, are undeniable and their
advanced state in technologies and health care are known even to
Iranian people who wish medical attendance in Israeli hospitals for
their loved ones, and if anybody says it is all because of dependence
on the U.S., I would respond that Saudi has also been dependent on the
U.S. but is a symbol of backwardness in the world and not advancement.

I have written before that "I do not approve the attacks of Israeli
state against the Palestinians and if some Israel's officials still
imagine they have legitimacy of owning a piece of land in the Middle
East based on whatever has been the case some thousands of years ago
are wrong and the same way the Palestinians and Arabs who also imagine
that because of whatever has been owned by Arabs over half a century
ago to have the right to that land, are also dreaming. This is as if
one keeps saying white population has no right to the U.S. land,
because it belonged to Native Americans. The reality is that there is
a country of Israel because of whatever historical reasons, just like
all those Arab countries that exist because of some historical reasons
and one better see the reality and plan on that rather than having a
self-serving version of dream of history to try to solve today's
problems."

Thus basically I do not care for either side of the
Palestinian-Israeli conflict and I have already written in details my
views of the historical issues raised, and do not need to repeat here
and frankly I see it waste of time to argue these historical
discussions and I prefer to focus on practical reality of the Middle
East than to get drowned in history.

Iranians want good relations with Israel and it is to our advantage to
learn about technical and social advancements of Israel and looking at
Israel from the angle of Israel-Palestinian conflict has been a wrong
approach to Israel for over 20 years. The majority of leftists who
have been helping IRI all these years in continuing their lopsided
view of Israel are doing a disservice to Iran and Iranians and if
their so-called anti-imperialism ended up supporting an Islamist
reactionary revolution in 1979, their condoning and supporting
anti-Israeli rhetoric of IRI will put Iran at a situation worse than
the Iran-Iraq War.

Iranians do not want a war with Israel and if IRI leaders cause a war
with Israel, they are the ones who are causing another disaster for
Iran and Iranians, which can hurt us like the Iran-Iraq War, and
Islamists and leftists should answer for all the devastations that
will follow such an outcome. They better come to grips with the new
realities of the Middle East rather than putting Iran and Iranians at
risk



You're obviously mixing Israeli and Iraqi official statements with those
from Iran.

Let me help you: even the stupids in power in Tehran haven't issued any
similar statements. The "glorious" Israeli leaders have, however.

yet, you say nothing of Iran's blatant terrorist funding against
Israel,

You also always forget to say something about the British, US and
Israeli-state sponsored terrorism against Iran since over 80 years. So what?

it's intense historical hatred of the Jews

BS: the Jews are still living in Israel. Even this clerical regime haven't
"destroyed" them as your statement would indicate. How comes this?

How could it be Israel almost went to a war against Syria, Jordan, and Iraq
in 1980, in response to the Iraqi invasion of Iran and in support of Tehran?

How could it be the two countries are actually (even if clandestinelly)
activelly cooperating on a number of fields ever since?

(including support
for the Nazi holocaust of WW2),

Aha, now the Persians should have also supported the holocaust in the Europe
too?

How? What have they done in support of the holocaust? Refused to collaborate
with the British or ruled by the British marionette, and then also let
British and Soviet troops be stationed in their country? Was that
"supporting the holocaust"?

and the fact that it is actively
seeking to develop nuclear weapons with the SOLE purpose of being
directed against Israel.

Israel is actively developing and producing nuclear weapons already since
the mid 1960s with sole purpose of threatening its neighbours. Israel would
not admit this (nor Israel cares about all the international regulations it
broke or ignored), but explains this (indirectly) with the need for
self-defence.

Has Iran no right to self-defence only because it is ruled by a highly
unpopular (at home and abroad) regime?

It has the same rights like Israel. The difference is that the current
Israeli gov and such ignorants like you is not recognizing this: at earlier
times there was no problem regarding this fact between Jerusalem and Tehran.

Who's the fascist then?

Let me see: a country ruled by the militants, breaking international
regulations, ignoring decisions by international organizations, producing
WMDs, massively ignoring human rights, purposedly targeting civilians, being
aggressive against its neighbours and holding their territory occupied right
since its invention... Who could this be according to your own logic?

The US should have dealt with Tehran during
the hostage crisis, and I'm not referring to "Operation Eagle Claw"
either. Instead, we elected President Reagan and let Iraq fight a 8 yr
war with them.

Two moments are important in this statement:
a) according to you it appears that 4.5 millions (or how many?) of Jews
living in Israel and several millions more living abroad should dictate over
200 millions of Arabs and 70 millions of Persians what to do and what not,
why, and where to do it?

b) you elected Reagan because he was negotiating with the Mullahs, so that
these have held US hostages and not released them until exactly 30 minutes
after he moved into the White House. With other words: your own president
has neglected the safety of your co-citizens, and has neglected his duty as
an influential politician to bring them back home, because this was in his
private interest. Not only this: he then has also supplied arms worth $3
billion to an enemy of the USA (despite an official embargo), paid back
several billions in Iranian money and assets (despite these officially being
frozen) as well as promised that he would never do anything against the new
regime in Tehran....

Well, you can now explain what a "good" and "tremendous" President Reagan
was - and (certainly to your complete surprise) I would even agree regarding
many things he did, including his Iran-related politics. But, you can't deny
that he actually made himself guilty of comitting a traitory, and otherwise
you're permanently showing how stupid and ignorant and supportive for
aggressive actions you are, and how easy to manipulate by your own
politicians and propaganda.

As such, you can't be considered as a serious discutant on topics like
these.

The US has tried repeatedly to win over the
pro-democracy elements in Iranian society but has failed.

Truth: the US has indeed repeatedly won over the pro-democracy elements in
Iran. It removed a democratically ellected president there (in 1952) and
supported and financed brutal and oppressive regimes (not only the Shah, but
also the Mullahs) and Iranian terrorists (MKE/MKO etc.) instead.

Iran is
developing nuclear weapons for the purpose of destroying the Jewish
State.

Can you offer us even one single document that would confirm this and deny
any other purpose for such weapons being eventually in development in Iran?

I don't blame Israel at all for it's tough stance and threats
to pre-emptive attack/sabotage their efforts. And if Tehran is someday
wiped off the earth as a consequence of their own
anti-semitism/arrogance then so be it. I won't lose any sleep over
it...

So, it's only so that you simply hate Persians.

Where's the problem, Rob? Even the son of your Persian neighbour drives a
better car than you? Well, we all know their predilection for BMWs.... Has
he a better house than you? Hm, well, must depend on what he earns... Or has
he simply a better-looking wife than you?

BTW, you know what's interesting too? Just yesterday I chatted with several
Israeli Yom Kippour vets: the people I'm sure you consider a kind of
superhuman warriors, that win all, everything, and everywhere. They are
feed-up with wars, pain, blood, broken and missing limbs, suffering, terror
and destruction, and would prefer peace with Arabs and anybody else in the
ME to anything. Just such like you, which never put even their small toes
into danger - but can babble from their comfortable chairs with 5.000km of
ocean of safety between them and any direct threat - can support such
nonsensical ideas like the use of nuclear weapons anywhere at all.


Tom Cooper
Co-Author:
Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
and,
Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat:
http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/t...hp/title=S6585