Iran to Hold Holocaust Conference

[KBayDog]

Maybe if these tools had gone to classes while in college instead of taking over our embassy, they would not have to have this "conference."

Iran plans Holocaust conference

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- Iran, whose president has denied the Holocaust, said Sunday it would hold a conference to examine the scientific evidence concerning Nazi Germany's extermination of 6 million Jews.

Hard-line Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has recently provoked global condemnation for saying the Holocaust is a "myth" and calling for Israel to be wiped from the face of the earth.

Iran further alarmed Western countries last week by restarting its research at a nuclear facility after a two-year freeze.

"It is a strange world. It is possible to discuss everything except the Holocaust," Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi told reporters.

"The Foreign Ministry plans to hold a conference on the scientific aspect of the issue to discuss and review its repercussions."

Asefi did not say where or when the conference would be held or who would attend.

Earlier this month, the Association of Muslim Journalists, a hard-line group, proposed holding a similar conference.

But Asefi said he was not aware of the association's wishes. He said the conference he announced was planned and supported by the ministry.

On Saturday, Ahmadinejad urged the West to be open-minded enough to allow a free international debate on the real aspects of the Holocaust.

Rep. Tom Lantos, a California Democrat, has said he understood Iran was considering a conference to call into question the evidence that the Nazis conducted a mass murder of European Jews during World War II.

 

[nittany03]

Good God. What's the saying? "I reject your reality and substitute my own!" I guess I think if they say something with enough conviction, then it must become true. Dangerous attitude in anyone over the age of six, not to mention leaders of nuclear-aspiring nations.

 

[eye_malfunction]

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a fool. I'd hate for the US to have to fight Iran next because he didn't want to follow a few simple rules to make sure terrorists don't get weapons grade plutonium from his a**.

 

[eddie]

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a fool. I'd hate for the US to have to fight Iran next because he didn't want to follow a few simple rules to make sure terrorists don't get weapons grade plutonium from his a**.

Uh... that's the issue? Really?

 

[eye_malfunction]

Uh... that's the issue? Really?

I think there's a lot of issues with Iran. Don't you?

 

[zippy]

The Iranians are Shi'a muslims, and not even Arab. I would say that the chances of them giving nuclear material to UBL and the like are slim.

 

[nittany03]

The Iranians are Shi'a muslims, and not even Arab. I would say that the chances of them giving nuclear material to UBL and the like are slim.

Yes, but guess who the terrorists would be hitting with said nukes. I think they wouldn't necessarily have a problem with that. Politics makes for strange bedfellows.

 

[KBayDog]

There are only two things that will make these noble, peace-loving people see that they are a little off-base:

1. U.N. "sanctions"

2. "Strong condemnation" from the EU

 

[NavyLonghorn]

Can we in any way afford a fight with Iran? With so many resources commited to the middle east, whats going to keep China from rushing Taiwan, or North Korea pouring into the DMZ? Could we handle a multi front war of that caliber?

 

[KBayDog]

^I'll let you know when I finish with the HTs. Then, and only then, will I have more knowledge of our military capabilities than the JCS.

 

[NavyLonghorn]

Lol.

 

[eddie]

I think there's a lot of issues with Iran. Don't you?

Many issues, yes.

Maybe I misunderstood your statment.

I don't think Iran is being "foolish" at all, in the sense of the word you are using, nor are they worried about non-secure nuclear sites and terrorists making off with weapons. If anything, they would be selling/supplying these devices to such groups.

Zippy: maybe the Iranians won't give nukes to UBL, but they do pull strings at Hezbollah.

That being said, I have serious doubts about Iranian WMD actually being used against Israel or anybody else. I believe these weapons are being developed not to aid the jihad against Israel or the US, but as bargaining pieces (i.e. "we give them up if you give us X," OR "we're gonna nuke so-and-so if you don't do X"). Even in this kind of situation, I would go so far as to say that the terms of such an event would be Iran-centric and not apply to the general jihad. They may be extremeists, in an "extreme" situation, but I don't think they are stupid.

Either way, they should not be allowed to develop the capacity in the first place, regardless of their true intentions.

As to the article that inspired this thread: sabre-rattling which will probably be ignored.

 

[Brett327]

Many issues, yes.

Maybe I misunderstood your statment.

I don't think Iran is being "foolish" at all, in the sense of the word you are using, nor are they worried about non-secure nuclear sites and terrorists making off with weapons. If anything, they would be selling/supplying these devices to such groups.

Zippy: maybe the Iranians won't give nukes to UBL, but they do pull strings at Hezbollah.

That being said, I have serious doubts about Iranian WMD actually being used against Israel or anybody else. I believe these weapons are being developed not to aid the jihad against Israel or the US, but as bargaining pieces (i.e. "we give them up if you give us X," OR "we're gonna nuke so-and-so if you don't do X"). Even in this kind of situation, I would go so far as to say that the terms of such an event would be Iran-centric and not apply to the general jihad. They may be extremeists, in an "extreme" situation, but I don't think they are stupid.

Either way, they should not be allowed to develop the capacity in the first place, regardless of their true intentions.

As to the article that inspired this thread: sabre-rattling which will probably be ignored.

Wise beyond your years, Eddie-san.

Brett

 

[eddie]

I fear you think them more civilized than they are...if they were "smart" they would have kept the US on their side against israel...but instead they bombed the US...then london and previously in other embassies etc...which essentially turned the entire western world against them. They had support for their campaigns against Israel until they bombed the US and then Americans began to understand what Israelis feel on a daily basis and our minds started to change...so by no means is Iran smart...they will create these weapons and I believe use them without a second thought. That is their nature and their belief...that it is right....in their minds...do not analyze them in a western way when their culture and ideologies are the exact opposite of the western world's culture and ideologies..

my .02

I didn't say they were smart. I said : "They may be extremeists, in an 'extreme' situation, but I don't think they are stupid."

I think we're discussing two different things. I'm talking specifically about Iranian top leadership; I believe you are referencing general Islamic Fundamentlist terrorism. Related, but different.

Ok, we can debate their (i.e. Fundamentalists/Iranians/whoever... bad guys of the month??) cultural backwardness and in-humaness for centuries, but, just hear me out here, and then we'll have another round at it, I promise.

Way I see it:

No matter how you slice it, Iran is a state, and has a sense of self-preservation, regardless of the ideologies it's leadership preaches. This leadership knows that we can wipe them off the face of the Earth if we so please: they are in an "extreme" situation, and I think they want to develop the Nuclear Card to get out of said situation.

Does this mean that in the future, a stronger Iran (deities-forbid) would not strike Israel with WMDs? NO! Of course they would. But, given their present balls-to-the-walls position, I do not believe it is their primary objective with said weapons.

 

[mkoch]

I didn't say they were smart. I said : "They may be extremeists, in an 'extreme' situation, but I don't think they are stupid."

I think we're discussing two different things. I'm talking specifically about Iranian top leadership; I believe you are referencing general Islamic Fundamentlist terrorism. Related, but different.

Ok, we can debate their (i.e. Fundamentalists/Iranians/whoever... bad guys of the month??) cultural backwardness and in-humaness for centuries, but, just hear me out here, and then we'll have another round at it, I promise.

Way I see it:

No matter how you slice it, Iran is a state, and has a sense of self-preservation, regardless of the ideologies it's leadership preaches. This leadership knows that we can wipe them off the face of the Earth if we so please: they are in an "extreme" situation, and I think they want to develop the Nuclear Card to get out of said situation.

Does this mean that in the future, a stronger Iran (deities-forbid) would not strike Israel with WMDs? NO! Of course they would. But, given their present balls-to-the-walls position, I do not believe it is their primary objective with said weapons.

Exact same situation as North Korea. As soon as they developed Nukes, the US et. al. suddenly got a whole lot less aggressive. Although, if North Korea were to use a nuke (offensively or in retaliation to invasion) I'm pretty sure all the top ten targets would be in South Korea. Though if we played our cards right, I'm sure a SEAL team could hotwire one to drop on the headquarters for Greenpeace...

But now, as for Iran, they are showing one thing Saddam didnt: balls. My own slightly lefty political view aside, Saddam tried a half-assed appeasement, which clearly didnt work, and Iran is basically saying, "I dare you". With the current political situation, the likelihood of anyone voting to approve an invasion at this point (ignoring any logistical/resource/money issues for the sake of argument) is slim to none. The public is pissed about Iraq, and Iran is seeing that as an opportunity.