Out in the open, Iran wants Israel to disappear

[bitkahuna]

TEHRAN, Oct. 26 - Iran's new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, told a group of students at an anti-Israel event on Wednesday that Israel "must be wiped off the map" and that attacks by Palestinians would destroy it, the ISNA news agency reported.

He was speaking to about 4,000 students at a program called "The World Without Zionism," in preparation for an annual anti-Israel demonstration held on the last Friday of the holy month of Ramadan.

Iran's new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, told a group of students at an anti-Israel event today that Israel must be "wiped off the map"

His tone was reminiscent of that of the early days of Iran's Islamic revolution in 1979. Iran and Israel have been bitter enemies since then, and anti-Israel slogans have been common at rallies.

Senior officials had avoided provocative language in the last decade, but Mr. Ahmadinejad appears to be taking a more confrontational tone than have recent Iranian leaders.

He said on Wednesday that the issue of a Palestinian state would be resolved only when Palestinians took control of all their lands.

"The establishment of a Zionist regime was a move by the world oppressor against the Islamic world," the news agency reported him as saying. "The skirmishes in the occupied land are part of the war of destiny. The outcome of hundreds of years of war will be defined in Palestinian land."

Referring to comments by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the Islamic revolution, Mr. Ahmadinejad said, "As the imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map."

Mr. Ahmadinejad's predecessor, Mohammad Khatami, in contrast, had proposed a dialogue among civilizations and pursued a policy of détente.

At the funeral of Pope John Paul II in April, Mr. Khatami was seated close to the Israeli president, Moshe Katsav, who said he shook hands and chatted briefly with Mr. Khatami. Mr. Katsav was born in the Iranian city of Yazd, which is Mr. Khatami's hometown.

But despite media photos that showed the two men standing next to each other, Mr. Khatami denied the account after he returned to Iran.

In response to Mr. Ahmadinejad's remarks, Mark Regev, a spokesman for Israel's Foreign Ministry, said, "Unfortunately, this is not the first time we've seen such extreme statements from senior Iranian leaders," adding, "We see today that there is a growing understanding in the international community that the extremist regime in Tehran is not just Israel's problem, but rather an issue that the entire international community must grapple with."

Israel contends that Iran finances a number of Palestinian armed factions that carry out attacks against Israel, including Islamic Jihad, which claimed responsibility for a suicide bombing that killed at least five people on Wednesday in the Israeli coastal town of Hadera.

In Washington, a State Department spokesman, Sean McCormack, said that the remarks reconfirmed "what we have been saying about this particular regime in Iran."

"I think that it only serves to underscore our concern, as well as the international community's concern, about Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons," he added.

Mr. Ahmadinejad on Wednesday also called Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip a trick, and said that Gaza was part of Palestinian territories and that the withdrawal was aimed at persuading Islamic nations to acknowledge Israel.

"Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury," he said. He added that any Islamic leader "who recognizes the Zionist regime means he is acknowledging the surrender and defeat of the Islamic world."

[1SICKLEX]

I was about to post this too. Insane, which is comon for them

[ebruce2]

well, as long as Israel has the backing of the US, they are going to be around for quite some time.

[drink300]

Originally Posted by ebruce2

well, as long as Israel has the backing of the US, they are going to be around for quite some time.

And as long as the US backs Israel, it will be around for a long time.

Of course, I'm religious and the Bible makes it clear that whoever backs the Jews will be protected and blessed by God. So far, so good for the U.S.

drink300

[Leets]

What I find truly saddening is the fact that one little plot of land has been violently fought over for hundreds of years, all in the name of religions whose founders preached peace and acceptance.

[Kilo]

Originally Posted by ebruce2

well, as long as Israel has the backing of the US, they are going to be around for quite some time.

On the flip side of the coin - as long as the US backs Israel, the US will always be a target for terrorist attacks.

[drink300]

Originally Posted by Kilo

On the flip side of the coin - as long as the US backs Israel, the US will always be a target for terrorist attacks.

Even if we stop supporting Israel, we will be attacked. Islamic radicals hate us for many reasons - mainly our free capitalistic society. They despise Americans and the way we live. So, Israel or not, we will always be under attack.

drink300

[mmarshall]

I rarely post in the DEBATE thread anymore but I want to say something here. This, IMO, is proof of what Bush warned the world about several years ago when he specifically named Iran as one of the countries in the " Axis of Evil " . Ever since 1979, with the fall of the Shah's government and the grabbing of our Embassy hostages, Iran has been run by maniacs.....though, with the exception of one day in 1987 when we fought a brief one-day war with the Iranian Navy and took out several gunboats, they have avoided direct combat with U.S. or Allied forces.....preferring to fund terrorism instead.
Unfortunately, there isn't much chance of us taking out this regime due to the fact that we are stretched so thin....we're still tied up in Iraq, Afghanistan, and with the threat of North Korea on the horizon.

[BlkGS3]

"peacefull nuclear applications" ----MY @SS

[bitkahuna]

So should the U.S. just wait until Iran has nukes and take out Israel, or act sooner?

It doesn't matter actually, I believe Israel is going to unilaterally strike Iran very soon.

[BlkGS3]

Yeah they did it before to some nation. I just cant remember which one

[Lil4X]

Originally Posted by BlkGS3

Yeah they did it before to some nation. I just cant remember which one

You're probably thinking about the Israeli air strike on the Osiraq (or Osirak) nuclear center 18 km southeast of Baghdad back in 1981. The French-designed "Osiris" reactor was designated an "MTR" (materials testing reactor) - not officially a threat to weapons-making, but it was known to be manufacturing plutonium - the only use of which is nuclear weapons. Iran had first conducted a strike against the plant in late 1980 which had little effect. The small-scale Israeli raid did not destroy the plant, but it did damage it, and more importantly, it exposed the French complicity in setting up a weapons-grade plutonium plant on Iraqi soil. France and other European nations, fearing further exposure, publicly declined to rebuild the plant, but with their clandestine assistance, it remained in production of enriched uranium.

During Desert Storm ten years later, several raids by American F-16s and F-117s "severely degraded" the capability of the plant - one of the most heavily-fortified targets in the Middle East. It was again repaired and went back into production until the invasion of Iraq and the fall of Sadaam ten years later. Until that time it was still Sadaam's primary nuclear weapons plant with the capacity to produce sufficient enriched uranium to construct five or six weapons per year.

Following each raid on the Osiraq reactor, much acrimony and fist-shaking was evident at the UN, but privately most nations were glad to see this threat taken out of the hands of such an unstable tyrant as Sadaam Hussein.

[mmarshall]

Originally Posted by Lil4X

You're probably thinking about the Israeli air strike on the Osiraq (or Osirak) nuclear center 18 km southeast of Baghdad back in 1981. .

During Desert Storm a year later, .

Desert Storm was 10 years after the Israeli raid, Lil....not one.

Given a continuation of the present regime in Tehran, though I certainly don't want to see any more bloodshed, the Israelis may have no choice but to strike. The problem, though, is getting there.......when they hit Bagdad in 1981, they were at the extreme range of both the F-16 attack planes and the F-15 escorts.....and they fooled the Saudi and Jordanian air controllers with Arabic-speaking pilots. Tehran is a lot further away than Bagdad.....and the Israelis do not have aircraft carriers like we do that could strike from the Persian Gulf or Indian Ocean. Moreover, their Air Force planes do not have catapult attachments ( or carrier-grade arresting hooks ) that could be used on American carriers to launch them closer to Tehran, and of course their pilots are not trained in carrier operations. I don't see any way they can realistically GET to Tehran except by American...or British.....tanker planes.....and then that brings up the question of where and how they would do the in-flight refueling as to avoid political repercussions from or confrontations with neutral countries, and also crew fatigue in the Israeli planes on that LONG flight. The only other realistic possibility, of course, is for us to do the Israelis's dirty work for them and for our Navy carriers to strike with their own attack planes from offshore.........a scenario that Bush and Rumsfeld have not ruled out.

( This, BTW, is one reason why I have always been a STRONG supporter of aircraft carriers and Naval / Marine Aviation )

[Lil4X]

My mistake - see what happens when I haven't had at least TWO cups of coffee before I post? Thanks for catching my error, mmarshall!

You're right too, that Israel's raid on Osiraq was a nifty bit of low-altitude flying to extreme range - Iran might be just out of reach. However, WE have F117s and B-2s on Diego Garcia and a Carrier Air Group on station in the Arabian Sea ready to perform the same service as needed.

Israel's aircraft, primarily F-15s and F-16s as you say were not designed for carrier traps, nor are their pilots, as good as they are, carrier qualified; so the carrier on station couldn't even serve as a divert field for an Israeli attack force. Landing them on one of our bases in Iraq or Kuwait to refuel would probably cause the local Sheiks to blow an o-ring or two, so that's off the table as well.

I seem to recall seeing refueling probes/receptacles on IAF aircraft - so aerial refueling might be possible using our tanker fleet - although I'm not sure how practiced IAF pilots are at the procedure. No if we're going to be blamed, we'd just as well take the WHOLE blame - "in for a penny, in for a pound . . . "

Israel could be a huge help in terms of intelligence however. Their timing on the Osiraq raid was extremely critical - to destroy the reactor before sufficient weapons-grade material could be produced, yet enough to show the world that the production WAS underway was key to the mission. Mossad (Israeli intelligence) must have some outstanding resources in the area; they had that air strike planned down to the minute and its execution was perfect.

[Vegassc400]

I find it sad that after many years of moderates and reformers in charge in Iran and a lot of progress made, they've now reverted back to a hard line government. Now if we can only get the Iraq quagmire under control, we may be able to do something about a REAL threat.