• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Iran's new president: Yes, the Holocaust happened.

ecofarm said:
The regime needs to be on its best behavior, for any chance the Western world will go back on its word to prevent the regime from developing nukes. The hardliners can suck it up for a couple years, after nukes they will be given power. And the free world can say goodbye to the Persians for at least a couple generations.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I'm sure they will be on their best behavior and do just enough to get their nukes. Once they have them and even the possibility of a delivery system - they'll be near untouchable.
 
Sherman123 said:
Iran is an autocratic country but I do not believe it is a totalitarian state, far from it.
Click to expand...

No free press. A death sentence for gays. The largest supplier of terrorism globally. No outside news or TV, no internet and as soon as possible (nukes) no outside contact.

Returning to his statement I think it is a tacit acknowledgement. It's just a very bad one. From any Westerner I'd call it minimalism which goes in tandem with denialism. From the Iranian President and his foreign minister I'd call it progress and again I'd refer back to his relationship with the power bases in his home country.
Click to expand...

Minimalism is denial. He did not use the word genocide or holocaust, merely "any criminality". The West might be stupid, but we see what he's doing. He's making it possible to deny Western media charges of "acknowledgement" in local, controlled press. He suffers no damage domestically and we buy his line of BS as a concession? Win-win for the Poobah.
 
Smeagol said:
Ahmadinejad believed the Holocaust happened too. He basically implied it himself on Larry King Live but because denying it annoyed the Jews he denied it just to upset them.
Click to expand...

He said that? Citation?

He denies it as a matter of state propaganda to push conspiracy theory and terrorism against a Western liberal democracy. Let's have no doubt about that. This "he's just trolling" crap is for idiots.
 
Surely we will not fall for this diversionary tactic, only to be "surprised" later when they roll out a full nuclear arsenal.

Hitler talked nice for quite a while, too, before he attacked England.
 
ecofarm said:
He said that? Citation?

He denies it as a matter of state propaganda to push conspiracy theory and terrorism against a Western liberal democracy. Let's have no doubt about that. This "he's just trolling" crap is for idiots.
Click to expand...

Of course, any implication is open to a huge level of interpretation but when I watched the interview I got the sense he did believe the holocaust was true but enjoyed getting on Jewish people's nerves. I'd need to look it up, as can anyone. Too busy at the moment. Again, it was NOT a direct quote to that affect, only an implication. If you're asking for a direct quote, I don't have one.
 
Smeagol said:
Of course, any implication is open to a huge level of interpretation but when I watched the interview I got the sense he did believe the holocaust was true but enjoyed getting on Jewish people's nerves.
Click to expand...

You don't think he does it to push conspiracy theory and terrorism against Israel? That's unbelievable.
 
Smeagol said:
Ahmadinejad about the Holocaust at Larry King Show - YouTube
Click to expand...

Not amount of watching youtube changes the FACT that the Iranian regime employs holocaust denial as a tool of conspiracy theory for terrorism. I would not degrade myself as to entertain any notion that Apieceof**** is just trolling.

It's pointless to debate anyone who would write off holocaust denial by a terrorist state as "just trolling". Such is disgusting.
 
Ockham said:
The mullahs still pull the strings so Rouhani given his history really doesn't tip the balance to improvement in my book. Remove the mullahs and put in place some sort of representative government and then I'll start believing.
Click to expand...

Like the one they had before we helped remove Mohammad Mosaddegh?
 
Hatuey said:
Like the one they had before we helped remove Mohammad Mosaddegh?
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but that was 1953 and there were 26 years between Moaddegh being overthrown by the CIA coup, and the Iranian Revolution of 1979, with the rise of the Ayotollah's.
 
Ockham said:
Perhaps, but that was 1953 and there were 26 years between Moaddegh being overthrown by the CIA coup, and the Iranian Revolution of 1979, with the rise of the Ayotollah's.
Click to expand...

The rise of the Ayatollah's was a direct response to the 1953 coup. It couldn't possibly be a louder response to the West's constant redefining of the word "democracy". The regimes which tend to come after Western meddling always end up keeping the whole "authoritarian" part of our definition for "democracy". That said, I'm just wondering which "democracy" it is you want: the democracy they had under the Shah or the one they had under Mosaddegh?
 
Hatuey said:
The rise of the Ayatollah's was a direct response to the 1953 coup. It couldn't possibly be a louder response to the West's constant redefining of the word "democracy". The regimes which tend to come after Western meddling always end up keeping the whole "authoritarian" part of our definition for "democracy". That said, I'm just wondering which "democracy" it is you want: the democracy they had under the Shah or the one they had under Mosaddegh?
Click to expand...

In a 26 year period, a lot of things could have happened so I disagree with the "direct response" comment. I really don't care to have Iran be a democracy, in fact, I don't care much about Iran at all. Who should care is the people who live there. If they want mullah's they get them. If they want totalitarian dictators they can have them. What's certain is, in many ME countries, democracy doesn't mesh well with fragile religious zealotry of varying types which rely on violence. Frankly, in the U.S. best interest is a benevolent dictator which can be manipulated such as the Shah. But as with so many things, a promising outcome cannot always be engineered or in some cases bought.
 
Ockham said:
In a 26 year period, a lot of things could have happened so I disagree with the "direct response" comment.
Click to expand...

It's an extremely short period historically.

I really don't care to have Iran be a democracy, in fact, I don't care much about Iran at all. Who should care is the people who live there. If they want mullah's they get them. If they want totalitarian dictators they can have them. What's certain is, in many ME countries, democracy doesn't mesh well with fragile religious zealotry of varying types which rely on violence. Frankly, in the U.S. best interest is a benevolent dictator which can be manipulated such as the Shah. But as with so many things, a promising outcome cannot always be engineered or in some cases bought.
Click to expand...

I'm sure most Iranians don't want a totalitarian dictatorship. However, as that is what was given to them by Western governments (England, US) that is the form of ruling they have adopted in order to defend their collective interests. As far as a "benevolent" dictatorship being what is best for the US, given their reaction in the 70s to the Shah, and subsequent stance towards the US for the last 30 years, I'm not sure how logical that is.
 
Jredbaron96 said:
Iran's new president: Yes, the Holocaust happened – Amanpour - CNN.com Blogs



Well I'll be damned. What say you?[/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

I'd say that he didn't actually admit that there was a Holocaust. I watched it, and preceded by your quotation was something to the effect of "Well, I'm not a historian so I can't comment on the facts of history." Does that sound like someone that believes there was a systematic extermination of Jews occurring in Nazi Germany? No. He views this as just a crime like murder, and that Arab populations shouldn't have to give up land just because a couple Jews were killed in WW2.
 
ecofarm said:
You're looking way too hard to find diversity in totalitarian dictatorship. Of course the Poobah puts on a theatre for his people and the international community.

But let's stay on specific topic for the moment...


Do you think this constitutes admitting the holocaust:

Do you admit the holocaust?
No answer.
A bit later... Do you admit the holocaust?
Any criminality is bad.


That's holocaust denial.
Click to expand...

It's rhetoric, eco. Rouhani and Al Khamenei do not actually believe that the holocaust never happened (I can't speak for Ahmadinejad - that guy had some screws loose). They use rhetoric as a political tool. So far, it's been to defiantly piss the US and Israel off.

Clearly, there has been a tempering of that rhetoric. This is consistent with other indicators that suggest Iran is interested in working with the West on some sort of agreement. Do I think Iran is going to abandon their plans to achieve nuclear capability? Absolutely not. But they may be willing to strike some sort of deal regarding Syria or in slowing their nuclear progress in exchange for some economic relief.

And I don't agree that Al Khamenei can so easily remove Rouhani. I'm with Sherman. I know you remember Ahmadinejad's reelection. Al Khamenei is not going to risk poking the tiger, especially amidst the wake of the Arab Spring.
 
the_recruit said:
It's rhetoric, eco. Rouhani and Al Khamenei do not actually believe that the holocaust never happened (I can't speak for Ahmadinejad - that guy had some screws loose). They use rhetoric as a political tool. So far, it's been to defiantly piss the US and Israel off.
Click to expand...

Too simple. If they used such rhetoric just to troll the US and Israel, we need not be concerned. But that's not really why they do it. They do it to propagate CT and terrorism against Israel, in an attempt to delegitimize the state. They use their state press to make holocaust denial a fact of history to their populace. To fail to grasp this is to fail to comprehend the Iranian regime.

To deny the intent of the regime's holocaust denial is disgusting and bordering on antisemitic. It's not just to troll, it's to destroy the state of Israel.


Clearly, there has been a tempering of that rhetoric. This is consistent with other indicators that suggest Iran is interested in working with the West on some sort of agreement. Do I think Iran is going to abandon their plans to achieve nuclear capability? Absolutely not. But they may be willing to strike some sort of deal regarding Syria or in slowing their nuclear progress in exchange for some economic relief.
Click to expand...

Of course they will take a deal that slows their progress for economic relief. As long as they are moving towards nukes, they're happy. As we approach their deadline, I'm sure many distracting concessions will be presented. It means nothing.


And I don't agree that Al Khamenei can so easily remove Rouhani. I'm with Sherman. I know you remember Ahmadinejad's reelection. Al Khamenei is not going to risk poking the tiger, especially amidst the wake of the Arab Spring.
Click to expand...

The regime could invent charges and, through totalitarian state media, make them stick. They could then remove him from office on the invented charges and their populace would have no idea the real reason for removal. Let's also remember that the only reason this president exists is due to the regime's nomination. Make no mistake, he is their guy and will say what they tell him to.
 
Last edited:
Hatuey said:
It's an extremely short period historically.



I'm sure most Iranians don't want a totalitarian dictatorship. However, as that is what was given to them by Western governments (England, US) that is the form of ruling they have adopted in order to defend their collective interests. As far as a "benevolent" dictatorship being what is best for the US, given their reaction in the 70s to the Shah, and subsequent stance towards the US for the last 30 years, I'm not sure how logical that is.
Click to expand...
Bingo, we need to stay out of that region and stop trying to control other governments through direct military/covert means. Not once has our interference worked since the end of WWII.
 
Nynaeve Meara said:
Bingo, we need to stay out of that region and stop trying to control other governments through direct military/covert means. Not once has our interference worked since the end of WWII.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say it hasn't worked. We have had some successes. Most of Europe seems to be doing way better than they did right afte WWII. So our interference has worked. What hasn't worked is a well thought out, non-ethnocentric approach. We think that people want every part of our modernity. In reality, some are alright with simply buying the same gadgets and clothes as us. Others are okay with borrowing parts of our culture like our slang. However, rarely do they want to become like us in every way.
 
ecofarm said:
Too simple. If they used such rhetoric just to troll the US and Israel, we need not be concerned. But that's not really why they do it. They do it to propagate CT and terrorism against Israel, in an attempt to delegitimize the state. They use their state press to make holocaust denial a fact of history to their populace. To fail to grasp this is to fail to comprehend the Iranian regime.

To deny the intent of the regime's holocaust denial is disgusting and bordering on antisemitic. It's not just to troll, it's to destroy the state of Israel.
Click to expand...

:roll: Oh don't be so dramatic. I'm glad you concede that it's merely a political tool. If it's a tool they're using to destroy Israel, why are you so unhappy about this tempering of said tool? Would you rather they hasten the destruction of Israel instead? Why that's disgusting and bordering on anti-semitic, eco. :roll:

ecofarm said:
Of course they will take a deal that slows their progress for economic relief. As long as they are moving towards nukes, they're happy. As we approach their deadline, I'm sure many distracting concessions will be presented. It means nothing.
Click to expand...

Of course they'll take a deal that slows their nuclear progress? Earlier you said this was just another stall tactic. It cannot be both. That doesn't make sense strategically. Think about it. The aim of the regime's stall tactics is to allow Iran to achieve nuclear capability BEFORE a strike from the West. Deliberately slowing their nuclear progress is completely counterproductive to that aim. It's one or the other, not both.

And why aren't you interested in slowing Iran's nuclear progress? That would be a good thing. Or what if this could be used to pressure Assad into a deal to end the bloodshed in Syria? ****ting on the talks before they've even begun would just be stupid, plain and simple. Your anti-Iran sentiment, however justified, is clouding your judgement on this one.

ecofarm said:
The regime could invent charges and, through totalitarian state media, make them stick. They could then remove him from office on the invented charges and their populace would have no idea the real reason for removal. Let's also remember that the only reason this president exists is due to the regime's nomination. Make no mistake, he is their guy and will say what they tell him to.
Click to expand...

The populace is not so stupid. The regime attempted these kind of petty lies during Ahmadinejad's reelection, and the masses weren't fooled a bit. Why would they be fooled now?
 
Hatuey said:
I wouldn't say it hasn't worked. We have had some successes. Most of Europe seems to be doing way better than they did right afte WWII. So our interference has worked. What hasn't worked is a well thought out, non-ethnocentric approach. We think that people want every part of our modernity. In reality, some are alright with simply buying the same gadgets and clothes as us. Others are okay with borrowing parts of our culture like our slang. However, rarely do they want to become like us in every way.
Click to expand...
Only reason Europe is doing better after WWII is thanks to our manufacturing that didn't get destroyed in the war. We have failed with every country we have intervened in; with regards to the middle east.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom