We're also friends of the American People- Iran President

1. 62

   pisean282311posted 13 years ago

   We're also friends of the American People. But although the United States has stored several thousand nuclear bombs, threatens others, interferes in others affairs, pressures the agency [I.A.E.A.], is arrogant, we are against these things. Are we considered the enemy of the United States or the wrong attitude of some American authorities? We are against wrong attitudes.

   replyreport
2. 77

   lovemychrisposted 13 years ago

   Makes sense to me.
   Yeah...I think I would be against us too.
   
   Why don't we here in America grow up?
   Leave others alone and take care of us. There are a lot of us suffering. Un-neccessarily.

   replyreport
   1. 71

      rhamsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      America has seemed to fall under an "All or nothing" basis for conversations.  If when discussing issues the other person says something we disagree with we have a desire to collapse all their domains.  This can take the form of questioning their motives, defining their alliances, critisizing their accomplishments or just downright insulting them.  This shows a weakness of knowledge of the issues as no concrete evidence is immeadiately available to offer as reproof of their position.
      
      Therefore people who do this, group the opposing opinion into the enemy group and do little internalizing of the opinions being offered.
      
      Ahmadinejad has some points worth closer examination while other more provocative comments such as the falsehood of the holocausts happening can be easily discounted.  Because of his position on the jews is everything he says invalid?

      replyreport
      1. 56

         Sab Ohposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         "Because of his position on the jews is everything he says invalid?"
         
         
         Yes.

         replyreport
         1. 71

            rhamsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            You know I was thinking very much of you as I wrote this and you have proven without thought as I expected.
            
            Read the part about internalizing again.  It may help you to understand better.  That is if you wish to understand better.

            replyreport
            1. 56

               Sab Ohposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               Not in accord with what you want to hear = "without thought"
               
               What a surprise 

               replyreport
               1. 71

                  rhamsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Thanks again for proving my point.
                  
                  Such a tool! 

                  replyreport
                  1. 56

                     Sab Ohposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     Too bad you don't really understand the point that has been proven.

                     replyreport
                     1. 71

                        rhamsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        Good try. I don't think my understanding the point is the question.  It whizzing by your head is though.

                        replyreport
                        1. 56

                           Sab Ohposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                           " I don't think my understanding the point is the question"
                           
                           No you don't, and that is the problem you can't solve.

                           replyreport
3. 64

   Greek Oneposted 13 years ago

   He has personally been making friends with the American people since 1979...
   
   
   
   Let him get elected in an honest and open election and then we'll talk

   replyreport
   1. 62

      pisean282311posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      

      replyreport
   2. 71

      rhamsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      That's a good one.   Hardly speaks to the subject though.

      replyreport
      1. 64

         Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         yeah.. i think it does.
         
         Ahmadinejad doesn't speak for the Iranian people, and has shown that he could care less for the rule of law.. why should anyone take pointers from him?
         
         I agree with you that America has a lot to learn, and it would be wise to figure out the reasons so much of the rest of the world hates it...
         
         but that being said, Ahmadinejad is the last person who is qualified to teach these lessons

         replyreport
         1. 71

            rhamsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            The point he made in his statement was about Americas involvement with objectivity.  Something that a lot of people don't get.  Is he a shinning example of how to get it done or what to follow?  Of course not.  The message is more important than the person is all I am saying.  With Americas world empire activities there has to be some pause to think about Americas motives.
            
            Here are a few thoughtful quotes that might help.  Who wrote them?
            
            "Without law and order our nation cannot survive."
            
            "The ink of a scholar is more sacred than the blood of the martyr."
            
            "Politics is war without bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed."
            
            "Destroy the family, you destroy the country"

            replyreport
            1. 56

               Sab Ohposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               Spin from an apologist for terrorists and holocaust deniers is particularly distasteful.

               replyreport
               1. 71

                  rhamsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Words of a fool.

                  replyreport
                  1. 56

                     Sab Ohposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     Don't blame me if who you choose to get into bed with reflects badly on you.

                     replyreport
            2. 64

               Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               I know what you’re saying, but I would urge us to get into dialogue with credible people who can deliver messages that reflect the accurate beliefs and opinions of their people...   instead of legitimizing dictators by giving the time of day to those who suppress these beliefs and opinions, and whose rhetoric is more often than not intended for a domestic audience, rather than for the purpose of international understanding

               replyreport
               1. 71

                  rhamsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  That is a good way and admiral way of defraying the point.  Knowledge comes in many forms and from many sources we don't understand.  If you study your enemy and understand his thoughts you may begin to understand his motives.  Many jump to easy conclusions based on their own understanding and waste a lot of time and effort in the process.
                  
                  Did you guess who made the quotes?
                  
                  "Without law and order our nation cannot survive."
                  Adolf Hitler
                  
                  "The ink of a scholar is more sacred than the blood of the martyr."
                  Mohammed
                  
                  "Politics is war without bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed."
                  Mau Tse-Tung
                  
                  "Destroy the family, you destroy the country."
                  Vladimir Lenin

                  replyreport
                  1. 64

                     Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     .....and I wouldn't sit down and chat with Hitler to get his insight either

                     replyreport
                     1. 71

                        rhamsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        Still don't get the point.

                        replyreport
                        1. 64

                           Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                           i got your point, i just don't think that if we are interested in seeking an understanding of what that part of the world is really saying, that he would be the best person to tune into.
                           
                           He has motives, biases and extreme views that are not shared with the rest of the people even in his own country.  If we truly don't want to have a "weakness of knowledge of the issues", why seek knowledge from someone who is not the best person to give it?  Just because he has the military power and thus a platform to give it?  I would deal with him on security issues because he is the dictator of his country… but he is not the person who can accurate express his people's beliefs and opinions.

                           replyreport
                           1. 77

                              lovemychrisposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                              Same could be said of Netanyahu, yet we support him un-questionably. If you don't, you catch hell.
                              
                              And it is extremely  disingenuous to talk about the holocaust that the Jewish people suffered without mentioning the genocide they themselves are committing now!
                              That was 60+ years ago...what about right now --2010. It is the Jews who are the perpetrators this time...when do we deal with that?
                              
                              It's OK for them??
                              NO.
                              
                              And it's not OK for us to do what we do either....Like Ron Paul said: Dismantle the CIA.
                              Or stop talking about terrorism and mistreatment.
                              Beause it's not called one thing when they do it and another when we do...it's all the same thing!!

                              replyreport
                           2. 71

                              rhamsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                              Greek One:
                              
                              Then you got the point that maybe the US is not a good choice as the mediator of the situation in the middle east because of its nuclear arsenal, relationship with Israel and operating invasionary exploits in other countries without the support of it's neighbors.
                              
                              That is what we truly need to take a look at. Is it any less valid because of who states it?  Even if he has other motives the facts speak for themselves alone.

                              replyreport
                              1. 64

                                 Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                 You asked about the validity of Ahmadinejad's statements, and whether the messenger negates the message.  I would say that in order to ascertain the accuracy of what he is saying, and whether it is truly reflective of the perspectives others in the region share, then yes, his motives certainly must be considered.  No one elected him as a spokeperson for Iran, let alone for anyone else in the region.
                                 
                                 Similarly, if you are talking about who should act as mediator between the Israelis and the Palestinians, then I would say it is up to those two groups as to who they want involved.
                                 As Ahmadinejad has his own interests and beliefs that are separate from those of both the Israelis and Palestinians (and I would argue detrimental to both), then his opinion as to the involvement of the United States should not exclude America's involvement if the two parties involved are in favor of it.
                                 
                                 Similarly, if Israel and Palestine don't want America's involvement (or want someone else to help in the process), then we should respect their wishes in that regard too.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 71

                                    rhamsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                    I agree with almost everything you stated.  Where I take exception is that the two parties involved (Israel and the Palestinians) are not the only ones using a nuclear element to the mix.
                                    
                                    The US also has a bad reputation in negotiating from any other stance other than a victor in a war.  We were good at negotiating peace with anybody we beat in a conflict.  We have been lapse in negotiating agreements where war has not been the vehicle.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 64

                                       Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                       Well, the US is not Switzerland, that's for sure..
                                       
                                       Regardless of who the mediators are, no solution will work if it does not consider the medaling involvement of others parites. 
                                       
                                       To that point, like i mentioned, while we don't need lessons from Ahmadinejad, he controls a military force in the region and his influence in that regard can't be denied or ignored.

                                       report
                                 2. 77

                                    lovemychrisposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                    The problem is we ARE involved.
                                    We have taken sides with Israel.
                                    We are not honest brokers--it's not allowed.
                                    Why?
                                    Who died and made Bebe King?
                                    
                                    "U.S. Military Aid and the Israel/Palestine Conflict
                                    
                                    The U.S. is providing Israel with at least $7.0 million each day* in military aid and is giving the Palestinians $0** in military aid during Fiscal Year 2009.
                                    
                                    Daily U.S. Military Aid to Israel
                                    and the Palestinians, FY2009"--from If Americans Knew web-site
                                    
                                    The Times Feb 24, 2009:
                                    
                                    "The US has long been the largest arms supplier to Israel. Under a 10-year agreement negotiated by the Bush Administration the US will provide £21 billion in military aid to the country.
                                    
                                    "As the major supplier of weapons to Israel, the USA has a particular obligation to stop any supply that contributes to gross violations of the laws of war and of human rights. The Obama Administration should immediately suspend US military aid to Israel", said Malcolm Smart, Amnesty’s Middle East director."
                                    
                                    
                                    And where are the protests about this?

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 71

                                       rhamsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                       I agree with your point that we should not be supporting Israel our the law is quite clear about it.
                                       
                                       The US Foreign Assistance Act (FAA) and the US Arms Export Control Act (AECA) strictly forbid the government from giving military assistance to any country that violates internationally recognized human rights.
                                       
                                       From another post:
                                       
                                       "Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don't worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it."  - Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, October 3, 2001
                                       
                                       More: http://www.globalexchange.org/countries … asons.html

                                       report
               2. 56

                  Sab Ohposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  " I would urge us to get into dialogue with credible people who can deliver messages that reflect the accurate beliefs and opinions of their people...   instead of legitimizing dictators by giving the time of day to those who suppress these beliefs and opinions, and whose rhetoric is more often than not intended for a domestic audience, rather than for the purpose of international understanding"
                  
                  That is an excellent point that only someone who is an apologist for dictators or an insecure guardian of a fragile ego that has taken up a faulty position would not recognize.

                  replyreport
                  1. 71

                     rhamsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     As a great wise man once said:
                     
                     " 'Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces.' "
                     
                     Jesus Christ

                     replyreport
                     1. 56

                        Sab Ohposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        Just admitting when you are clearly wrong would probably be less humiliating than your current approach.

                        replyreport
                        1. 71

                           rhamsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                           Sab Oh.  I guess we can't converse on a subject that is clearly over your head.  You ramble on about the argument yet don't participate in the gist of the conversation.
                           
                           If all you are looking for is who is right and who is wrong in an argument then you are barking up the wrong tree with me.
                           
                           I would suggest in the future you try to make a few points worth someones pondering and you may teach someone and better yet learn something along the way.
                           
                           Good day to you sir.

                           replyreport
                           1. 56

                              Sab Ohposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                              "I guess we can't converse on a subject that is clearly over your head.  "
                              
                              
                              Let me know when you find one.

                              replyreport
                              1. 71

                                 rhamsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                 I am trying to think of one for you.  I'll get back to you.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 56

                                    Sab Ohposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                    Maybe we can talk about the INS 

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 71

                                       rhamsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                       

                                       report
4. 60

   theirishobserver.posted 13 years ago

   Is that your nuclear deterent or are you just glad to see me

   replyreport