Why would Israel attack Iran?

[Cactusboy]

Shiraz Dossa, a professor of Political Science at St. Francis Xavier University in Nova Scotia, Canada, also believes the text is a mistranslation.^[18]

 

Ahmadinejad was quoting the Ayatollah Khomeini in the specific speech under discussion: what he said was that "the occupation regime over Jerusalem should vanish from the page of time." No state action is envisaged in this lament; it denotes a spiritual wish, whereas the erroneous translation – "wipe Israel off the map" – suggests a military threat. There is a huge chasm between the correct and the incorrect translations. The notion that Iran can "wipe out" U.S.-backed, nuclear-armed Israel is ludicrous.^[19][20]

[Cactusboy]

He's a bit of a nut job...I mean he says there are no gay people in Iran. but's let's be objective here and stick w/ some basic facts. Always a good thing, especially when we're talking about something that could/would lead to a major war.

 

 

 

 

Clarifying comments

 

 

 

At a news conference on January 14, 2006, Ahmadinejad stated his speech had been exaggerated and misinterpreted.^[26] "There is no new policy, they created a lot of hue and cry over that. It is clear what we say: Let the Palestinians participate in free elections and they will say what they want." Speaking at a D-8 summit meeting in July 2008, he denied that his country would ever instigate military action. Instead he claimed that "the Zionist regime" in Israel would eventually collapse on its own.^[27][28]

 

Asked if he objected to the government of Israel or Jewish people, he said that "creating an objection against the Zionists doesn't mean that there are objections against the Jewish". He added that Jews lived in Iran and were represented in the country's parliament.

^[27

 

 

 

 

 

 

In a September 2008 interview Ahmadinejad was asked: "If the Palestinian leaders agree to a two-state solution, could Iran live with an Israeli state?" He replied:

 

If they [the Palestinians] want to keep the Zionists, they can stay ... Whatever the people decide, we will respect it. I mean, it's very much in correspondence with our proposal to allow Palestinian people to decide through free referendums.

^[29]

[JJ Husker]

 

So do you know exactl how experts say it was mistranslated and what they say he really said?

 

No, I do not. Who are these experts? Where are they from? Where is the link that claims it was mistranslation?

The only indication I have ever seen that it might've been a mistranslation is in this post of yours and the link you provided. This is all your link had to say about it; "Putting aside Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s inflammatory comments that Israel should be “wiped off the face of the Earth” (which some Iranians claim privately was a mistranslation),...." Considering the juvenile writing contained in this link of yours and the widely reported claims, by actual news agencies, of what Achmadikhed really said, why do you think it was even possibly a mistranslation?

 

"some Iranians claim privately" does not equal "experts", or really anything more than things they were ashamed to say out loud.

 

If you can pin this down, you might have an Emmy worthy story going for you. If your link is your example of honest, open-minded, objective, independent research, I've got news for you. It doesn't say what you think it does and it is a little more than frightening that is what you took away from reading it.

 

BTW- When you cannot honestly answer a direct question without that answer contradicting your point of view, i's a pretty good sign you might be on the wrong track. Come on, do you kick the guy in the contikky first or not?

[JJ Husker]

I see no substantial difference to Israel whether he said "wipe off the map" or "this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time". Sure one seems a little more inflammatory but, if you're Israel, it's 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.

[Sub-Husker]

Do you believe that Israel has zero reason to hold Palestine under their thumbs?

 

Strawman.

 

Perhaps a better question is "Does Isreal have valid reasons for holding thousands of Palestinians, including women and children, indefinitely without charge?"

[Sub-Husker]

And it is a war crime if Iran sends nukes to Israel and blows up their country.

 

Not if it is retaliation for a first strike by Israel.

[Sub-Husker]

So do you know exactl how experts say it was mistranslated and what they say he really said?

 

Most people are ignorant to the actual translation, and go with the Sunni mis-translation.

 

He was calling for regime change, just as we call for in many nations... then carry out.

[walksalone]

I get a kick out of the fact that everyone seems to forget, nobody in this neck of the woods has gotten along in over two millenia.

[Sub-Husker]

I get a kick out of the fact that everyone seems to forget, nobody in this neck of the woods has gotten along in over two millenia.

 

Please speak for yourself.

 

Shall we go into the details of how a non-homogenous tribal society can have its various tribes working against each other, especially when external money and arms are introduced?

[knapplc]

and you think a democratically electected leader in any mideast country would go along w/ the illegal acts Israel is engaged in w/ regards to the Palestinians? If Israel wants peace it will have to start actingl like a peaceful neighbor. Putting a stop the breaking of UN Resolutions and war crimes would be a great start.

 

Surely you're not implying that Israel has no legal foundation for their treatment of Palestine/Palestinians, yes? Do you believe that Israel has zero reason to hold Palestine under their thumbs?

 

 

It's not a straw man. I directly responded to cactus' assertion. I didn't misrepresent his statement in any way.

[Cactusboy]

I see no substantial difference to Israel whether he said "wipe off the map" or "this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time". Sure one seems a little more inflammatory but, if you're Israel, it's 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.

 

THere is a huge difference. Wipe off face of the map means kill all the civilians...regime change means new leadership. and it doesn't even mean through death. It's a regime that is responsible for an very brutal illegal occupation. We are talking about what has a legit potential of the start of the biggest war since WWII. I think it's fair to say we need to act a little more like Kennedy during the Cuban MIsssle Crisis and less like Yosemite Sam after a couple of cold ones.

 

NOW...since you lectured me on above before reading my replies...or even attempting to have a legit discussion..it's my turn to lecture you.

 

 

Actually I'll keep it short and to the point. THis is the 2nd time in the recent past your knee jerkish responses to me have ended backfiring on you. Let's just all try to use a little patience and at least attempt to have productive discussions before resorting to this.

 

NOW...even if there is just a small difference...WHY do you think you never hear about this difference in the media? Why don't they say he wants regime change in Israel? It's odd, huh? Again...start to do some objective, honest research on this subject and you'll have quite a few WTF moments.

 

So it doesn't look like I'm setting you up for another knee jerk response...the reason is the Israel lobby and the great influence they have on our politicians and media. The lobby isn't only Jews either. A large part of it is the religious right...people like John Hagee and his followers.

[Cactusboy]

I get a kick out of the fact that everyone seems to forget, nobody in this neck of the woods has gotten along in over two millenia.

 

US relatoins w/ Iran were fine before they nationalized their oil and England lost their rights to it and then talked us into helping them take out their democratically elected leader.

[Sub-Husker]

Here is some speculation as to what an Israeli attack on Iran might look like...

 

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/152411#.Ty1vq-TNLxt

[carlfense]

I see no substantial difference to Israel whether he said "wipe off the map" or "this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time". Sure one seems a little more inflammatory but, if you're Israel, it's 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.

 

THere is a huge difference. Wipe off face of the map means kill all the civilians...regime change means new leadership. and it doesn't even mean through death. It's a regime that is responsible for an very brutal illegal occupation. We are talking about what has a legit potential of the start of the biggest war since WWII. I think it's fair to say we need to act a little more like Kennedy during the Cuban MIsssle Crisis and less like Yosemite Sam after a couple of cool ones.

 

NOW...since you lectured me on above before reading my replies...or even attempting to have a legit discussion..it's my turn to lecture you.

 

 

Actually I'll keep it short and to the point. THis is the 2nd time in the recent past your knee jerkish responses to me have ended backfiring on you. Let's just all try to use a little patience and at least attempt to have productive discussions before resorting to this.

 

NOW...even if there is just a small difference...WHY do you think you never hear about this difference in the media? Why don't they he wants regime change in Israel? It's odd, huh? Again...start to do some objective, honest research on this subject and you'll have quite a few WTF moments.

 

So it doesn't look like I'm setting you up for another knee jerk response...the reason is the Israel lobby and the great influence they have on our politicians and media. The lobby isn't only Jews either. A large part of it is the religious right...people like John Hagee and his followers.

Nah. The people who wish that Pres. Bush or Pres. Obama's "regime would vanish from the face of the earth" are advocating the killing of all US citizens.

[Cactusboy]

I see no substantial difference to Israel whether he said "wipe off the map" or "this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time". Sure one seems a little more inflammatory but, if you're Israel, it's 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.

 

THere is a huge difference. Wipe off face of the map means kill all the civilians...regime change means new leadership. and it doesn't even mean through death. It's a regime that is responsible for an very brutal illegal occupation. We are talking about what has a legit potential of the start of the biggest war since WWII. I think it's fair to say we need to act a little more like Kennedy during the Cuban MIsssle Crisis and less like Yosemite Sam after a couple of cool ones.

 

NOW...since you lectured me on above before reading my replies...or even attempting to have a legit discussion..it's my turn to lecture you.

 

 

Actually I'll keep it short and to the point. THis is the 2nd time in the recent past your knee jerkish responses to me have ended backfiring on you. Let's just all try to use a little patience and at least attempt to have productive discussions before resorting to this.

 

NOW...even if there is just a small difference...WHY do you think you never hear about this difference in the media? Why don't they he wants regime change in Israel? It's odd, huh? Again...start to do some objective, honest research on this subject and you'll have quite a few WTF moments.

 

So it doesn't look like I'm setting you up for another knee jerk response...the reason is the Israel lobby and the great influence they have on our politicians and media. The lobby isn't only Jews either. A large part of it is the religious right...people like John Hagee and his followers.

Nah. The people who wish that Pres. Bush or Pres. Obama's "regime would vanish from the face of the earth" are advocating the killing of all US citizens.

 

 

Elaborate please? Who exactly...Iran? AQ and OBL, yes they believe in collective punishment that results in death...much like Israel does w/ Palestinians(Fact).