Khamenei calls ‘Death to America’ as Kerry hails progress on nuke deal

poweRob said:

Your source is questionable at best.

Click to expand...

Really?

Exactly how?

Listen, one sentence challenging the credibility of a "source" with the actual event taking place needs a bit more explanation, even when one is desperate not to say too much lest be revealed as a bull****ter...

So, let's have some actual examples of how this source is not to be trusted and John "I was for it until I was against it" Kerry and Barrack "you can keep your plan" Obama are to be trusted...

Frankly I think you're pissing upwind trying to put out a raging brush fire, the community organizer and 'hair that talks' are so far in over their heads they are more likely to start WW3 as ever tell the truth

Interesting article.
Why Iran May Be OK Letting the Saudis Win in Yemen | Al Jazeera America

And a Sudanese fighter pilot shot down...



Note the cheeks full of khat.

Grant said:

Iraq was 'stable' because the US Military was there.

Click to expand...

Iraq was actually stable before the US Military got there. I don't recall there being a terrorist problem, either. Or any viable threat to America.

Amadeus said:

Iraq was actually stable before the US Military got there. I don't recall there being a terrorist problem, either. Or any viable threat to America.

Click to expand...

I seem to recall Iraq invading its neighbor Kuwait, and then shooting at US fighter jets over its no fly zone, even shooting down drones.

I also seem to recall this prompting Bill Clinton and other dems to make regime change in Iraq official policy in Iraq.

US Conservative said:

I seem to recall Iraq invading its neighbor Kuwait, and then shooting at US fighter jets over its no fly zone, even shooting down drones.

I also seem to recall this prompting Bill Clinton and other dems to make regime change in Iraq official policy in Iraq.

Click to expand...

Yes, Saddam Hussain did have a way of ticking off the US and other western nations.

And, so, Clinton and other dems did want to make a regime change in Iraq.

Since the Democrats wanted it, it must have been the right thing to do, right?

Amadeus said:

Iraq was actually stable before the US Military got there. I don't recall there being a terrorist problem, either. Or any viable threat to America.

Click to expand...

______________

It was stable when I was there in '73 & hitch hiked/walked across the Trans-Syrian desert, from North to South & into Iran without witnessing demonstrations, militancy or experiencing any hostile treatment .

The only times I was "kidnapped" was by friendly Iraqis who insisted on paying for my meals or that I join them for family dinners, meet their friends or allow them to show me some of the more obscure archeological sites.

There was no hostility toward America or Americans, only curiosity about life in America, U.S. Mid East policy, American music, cars etc.



Recent sentiments of the IRANIAN people toward Westerners are reportedly similar to those I felt in Iraq

“Iran is the most charming country on Earth”
John Simpson: Iran is the most charming country on Earth - Telegraph

EXCERPT "What you would encounter is a genuine delight to see you: a distinctly old-fashioned affection for westerners, who have vanished from everyday life in Iran. Eating in a Tehran restaurant can sometimes be a trial: so many people want to greet you and indeed pay for your meal."CONTINUED

The British author (John Simpson) relates his experience at a "Death To Britain/Thatcher" demonstrating that hostile rhetoric from Iranian clerics is not to be taken seriously:

[Same Article]

EXCERPT "I weaved my way through the crowd, smiling and explaining that I was a Brit, and they opened up a pathway for me, shaking hands and bowing.
I finally reached the ringmaster, a professional demonstrator who was beating his chest, the spittle shooting from his mouth in his anti-British fervour. “Welcome, welcome to Iran, sir,” he said, and actually kissed my hand. It went down well on the news that night, I promise you."CONTINUED


So, apparently, there is more anti Iranian sentiment by poorly informed Americans than there is serious anti American sentiment from Iranians.

The bellicose "Death to America/Israel/Britain etc" is meaningless rhetoric


Thanks

Amadeus said:

Iraq was actually stable before the US Military got there. I don't recall there being a terrorist problem, either. Or any viable threat to America.

Click to expand...

Iraq was 'stable' under Saddam Hussein? Is that your claim? It seems you really don't recall the history of the region.

B'smith said:

______________

It was stable when I was there in '73 & hitch hiked/walked across the Trans-Syrian desert, from North to South & into Iran without witnessing demonstrations, militancy or experiencing any hostile treatment .

The only times I was "kidnapped" was by friendly Iraqis who insisted on paying for my meals or that I join them for family dinners, meet their friends or allow them to show me some of the more obscure archeological sites.

There was no hostility toward America or Americans, only curiosity about life in America, U.S. Mid East policy, American music, cars etc.



Recent sentiments of the IRANIAN people toward Westerners are reportedly similar to those I felt in Iraq

“Iran is the most charming country on Earth”
John Simpson: Iran is the most charming country on Earth - Telegraph

EXCERPT "What you would encounter is a genuine delight to see you: a distinctly old-fashioned affection for westerners, who have vanished from everyday life in Iran. Eating in a Tehran restaurant can sometimes be a trial: so many people want to greet you and indeed pay for your meal."CONTINUED

The British author (John Simpson) relates his experience at a "Death To Britain/Thatcher" demonstrating that hostile rhetoric from Iranian clerics is not to be taken seriously:

[Same Article]

EXCERPT "I weaved my way through the crowd, smiling and explaining that I was a Brit, and they opened up a pathway for me, shaking hands and bowing.
I finally reached the ringmaster, a professional demonstrator who was beating his chest, the spittle shooting from his mouth in his anti-British fervour. “Welcome, welcome to Iran, sir,” he said, and actually kissed my hand. It went down well on the news that night, I promise you."CONTINUED


So, apparently, there is more anti Iranian sentiment by poorly informed Americans than there is serious anti American sentiment from Iranians.

The bellicose "Death to America/Israel/Britain etc" is meaningless rhetoric. Thanks

Click to expand...

Of course 1973 in Iran, while under the Shah, was a long while ago.

It is generally agreed that Iranian words are not to be trusted but it may also be prudent to take their 'meaningless rhetoric' seriously.

Grant said:

Iraq was 'stable' under Saddam Hussein? Is that your claim? It seems you really don't recall the history of the region.

Click to expand...

Yes, it was stable. That's my claim. And lets remember that Saddam was facilitated to power by the US as a response to Iran. Now Iran owns Iraq, and did so before Obama.

Amadeus said:

And lets remember that Saddam was facilitated to power by the US as a response to Iran.

Click to expand...

Saddam's rise to power in Iraq (1976-1979) was purely an internal matter. The July 1979 coup was the final touch.

It wasn't until 1982 that Western/Arab nations began aiding Saddam in his war against Khomeini.

Amadeus said:

Yes, it was stable. That's my claim. And lets remember that Saddam was facilitated to power by the US as a response to Iran. Now Iran owns Iraq, and did so before Obama.

Click to expand...

____________________

Yugoslavia was "stable" under Tito also who was widely considered a benevolent dictator.

"Stable" is, of course, a relative term & not an ideal condition if you're among the enemies of the ruler/dictator in power. Your recollection of history is just fine.

Who could forget that photo of Saddam & Cheney hand in hand?

Amadeus said:

Yes, it was stable. That's my claim. And lets remember that Saddam was facilitated to power by the US as a response to Iran. Now Iran owns Iraq, and did so before Obama.

Click to expand...

Indeed,

US intelligence helped Saddam's Ba`ath Party seize power for the first time in 1963. Evidence suggests that Saddam was on the CIA payroll as early as 1959, when he participated in a failed assassination attempt against Iraqi strongman Abd al-Karim Qassem. In the 1980s, the US and Britain backed Saddam in the war against Iran, giving Iraq arms, money, satellite intelligence, and even chemical & bio-weapon precursors. As many as 90 US military advisors supported Iraqi forces and helped pick targets for Iraqi air and missile attacks.

https://www.globalpolicy.org/iraq-c...-/us-and-british-support-for-huss-regime.html

Amadeus said:

Yes, it was stable. That's my claim. And lets remember that Saddam was facilitated to power by the US as a response to Iran. Now Iran owns Iraq, and did so before Obama.

Click to expand...

Since when does genocide, invading neighbors, rape rooms, the seeking of nuclear weapons, and breaking international laws mean a dictatorship is "stable". You must have an odd definition of the word.

Iran owned Iraq before Obama came along? When was that?

Grant said:

Of course 1973 in Iran, while under the Shah, was a long while ago.

It is generally agreed that Iranian words are not to be trusted but it may also be prudent to take their 'meaningless rhetoric' seriously.

Click to expand...

When you say "generally agreed", what do you mean?

Do you mean "generally agreed" by people who hate Iran but have never been there & know nothing about Iran except what they're fed by a bias US media?

Iran has repeatedly reached out to the US to improve relations, especially under Pres. Khatami. Iran has also offered to help with America's deep water oil rig leaks & natural disasters.

Americans have only heard the speeches of Iranian leaders after they've been given a deliberately mistranslated, negative "spin". That infamous "Wipe Israel off of the face of the map" is still believed & robotically regurgitated by many Americans when the actual translation was: "Zionism will eventually disappear with the sands of time"

Have you ever taken time to read an accurate translation , in the full text of one of Ahmadinejad's U.N. speeches? They are not tantrums as is generally assumed.

Instead, they contain reasonable calls for an even handed US Foreign policy, the folly of military conflict & the necessity for a just & peaceful Palestinian - Israel resolution.


The meaningless, left-over, Revolutionary rhetoric behind "Death to America / Israel / Imperialism" etc is a feature of the same cultural hyperbole as in Mid East marketplaces.

When a M. E. merchant says "His family will starve" if he doesn't get X price, he doesn't mean it, knows you don't believe it & doesn't expect you to.
The hyperbolic marketplace haggling is a cultural feature that doesn't take place in US / Western grocery stores.

It's the same with "Death to America". The speaker doesn't mean it & doesn't expect his audience to believe he means it literally.

Of course Iran (like the US etc) has its thugs, Secret Prisons, & irrational hostilities. It has also maintained a secure & apparently content Jewish community that choses to stay in Iran.

What is damaging to US credibility is the egregious double standard that exists between ignoring Israel's extensive Nuclear arsenal while imposing draconian sanctions on Iran's non-arsenal which is a blatant hypocrisy that is not lost on Iran the rest of the World.

Thanks

B'smith said:

When you say "generally agreed", what do you mean?

Do you mean "generally agreed" by people who hate Iran but have never been there & know nothing about Iran except what they're fed by a bias US media?

Iran has repeatedly reached out to the US to improve relations, especially under Pres. Khatami. Iran has also offered to help with America's deep water oil rig leaks & natural disasters.

Americans have only heard the speeches of Iranian leaders after they've been given a deliberately mistranslated, negative "spin". That infamous "Wipe Israel off of the face of the map" is still believed & robotically regurgitated by many Americans when the actual translation was: "Zionism will eventually disappear with the sands of time"

Have you ever taken time to read an accurate translation , in the full text of one of Ahmadinejad's U.N. speeches? They are not tantrums as is "generally agreed".

Instead, they contain reasonable calls for an even handed US Foreign policy, the folly of military conflict & the necessity for a just & peaceful Palestinian - Israel resolution.


The meaningless, left-over, Revolutionary rhetoric behind "Death to America / Israel / Imperialism" etc is a feature of the same cultural hyperbole as in Mid East marketplaces.

When a M. E. merchant says "His family will starve" if he doesn't get X price, he doesn't mean it, knows you don't believe it & doesn't expect you to.
The hyperbolic marketplace haggling is a cultural feature that doesn't take place in US / Western grocery stores.

It's the same with "Death to America". The speaker doesn't mean it & doesn't expect his audience to believe he means it literally. Of course Iran (like the US etc) has its thugs, Secret Prisons, & irrational hostilities toward Gays. It has also maintained a secure & apparently content Jewish community that choses to stay in Iran. Meanwhile, the egregious double standard that exists between ignoring Israel's extensive Nuclear arsenal while imposing draconian sanctions on Iran's non-arsenal is an egregious hypocrisy that is not lost on Iran the rest of the World. Thanks

Click to expand...

When you were there while the Shah was in power there were over 100= 150,000 Jews in Iran. Now there are less than 9,000.

If "Death to the Israel" or "Death To America" is hyperbole, why repeat it? Are they so unsophisticated that they don't understand the significance of these words? If that is the case, as you claim, then how in the world can we expect these backward people to possess nuclear weapons?

Sharing a lunch with some Iranians over 40 years ago was probably a wonderful experience but the world is having to deal with the Iran of today.

https://www.google.ca/search?q=iran...v&sa=X&ei=CrsZVdvgCpewogSxkIKwBg&ved=0CBwQsAQ

B'smith said:

____________________

Who could forget that photo of Saddam & Cheney hand in hand?

Click to expand...

You feel, in this case, that foreign leaders or their representatives shaking hands when they meet is more deeply significant than this regular custom suggests? https://www.google.ca/search?q=stal...v&sa=X&ei=BrwZVcrwO4qsyATAh4HICQ&ved=0CBwQsAQ

Grant said:

Since when does genocide, invading neighbors, rape rooms, the seeking of nuclear weapons, and breaking international laws mean a dictatorship is "stable". You must have an odd definition of the word.

Iran owned Iraq before Obama came along? When was that?

Click to expand...

If your accusations were true, most historians would say that you just described most of the existing nuclear powers who admit & don't admit having a nuclear arsenal (except for the "Iran owned...." part)

What does this have to do with the veracity of "Death to America" & Nuclear Talks?

B'smith said:

If your accusations were true, most historians would say that you just described most of the existing nuclear powers who admit & don't admit having a nuclear arsenal (except for the "Iran owned...." part)

What does this have to do with the veracity of "Death to America" & Nuclear Talks?

Click to expand...

That was addressed to another poster concerning Iraq.

Montecresto said:

Indeed,

US intelligence helped Saddam's Ba`ath Party seize power for the first time in 1963. Evidence suggests that Saddam was on the CIA payroll as early as 1959, when he participated in a failed assassination attempt against Iraqi strongman Abd al-Karim Qassem.
https://www.globalpolicy.org/iraq-c...-/us-and-british-support-for-huss-regime.html

Click to expand...

There are no links, footnotes, or documents offered above verifying the "suggestion" that the US put Saddam in power as a response to Iran (as Amadeus claimed). The US did sometimes support the Iraqi Ba'ath Party due to its strong anti-Communist ideology, but there is no evidence that the CIA had any role in Saddam's ascent to internal power in the 1970's. CIA activities in Iraq

Saddam came to ultimate power in the years 1975-1979 and helped broker agreements* with the Shah of Iran ... agreements that only fell apart in 1979 with the Khomeini Iranian revolution.

* Algiers Agreement (1975)
* Treaty Concerning the Frontier and Neighborly Relations between Iran and Iraq (1975)
* Protocol Concerning the Delimitation of the River Frontier between Iran and Iraq (1975)

Saddam Key in Early CIA Plot (April 10, 2003)
According to former US intelligence officials and diplomats, the CIA's relationship with Saddam Hussein dates back to 1959, when he was part of a CIA-authorized six-man squad that attempted to assassinate Iraqi Prime Minister Abd al-Karim Qasim. (United Press International)

A Tyrant Forty Years in the Making (March 14, 2003)
Roger Morris writes of the "regime change" carried out by the CIA in Iraq forty years ago. Among the CIA's actions were attempted political assassinations and the handing over of a list of suspected communists and leftists that led to the deaths of thousands of Iraqis at the hands of Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath Party. (New York Times)

The Riegle Report (1994)
This report by the Senate Banking Committee analyzes the US's exports of warfare-related goods to Iraq and their possible impact on the health consequences of the Gulf War. The report concludes that the US provided Iraq "with 'dual-use' licensed materials which assisted in the development of Iraqi chemical, biological and missile-system programs." (Gulflink)

In February, Kassem is assassinated by members of the Ba'ath Party and the CIA helps the Ba'athists by providing lists of suspected communists for the party's hit squads, who kill an estimated 800 people. Saddam returns home and rejoins the party as an interrogator, torturer and killer. Nine months later, the army overthrows the Ba'ath Party and Saddam is jailed. He is said to have studied the political tactics of Hitler and Stalin while in prison.

Grant said:

When you were there while the Shah was in power there were over 100= 150,000 Jews in Iran. Now there are less than 9,000.

If "Death to the Israel" or "Death To America" is hyperbole, why repeat it? Are they so unsophisticated that they don't understand the significance of these words? If that is the case, as you claim, then how in the world can we expect these backward people to possess nuclear weapons?

Sharing a lunch with some Iranians over 40 years ago was probably a wonderful experience but the world is having to deal with the Iran of today.

https://www.google.ca/search?q=iran...v&sa=X&ei=CrsZVdvgCpewogSxkIKwBg&ved=0CBwQsAQ

Click to expand...

I don't know whether B'smith is right or not, but I do know that phrases translated from one language into another quite frequently change meanings. The famous statement by Krushchev, for example "We will bury you" was better translated as "We will leave you in the dust," not meant to be a threat but a challenge.

The "wipe Israel off of the face of the Earth" and "Death to America" phrases could well be the same thing.

Montecresto said:

Saddam Key in Early CIA Plot (April 10, 2003)
According to former US intelligence officials and diplomats, the CIA's relationship with Saddam Hussein dates back to 1959, when he was part of a CIA-authorized six-man squad that attempted to assassinate Iraqi Prime Minister Abd al-Karim Qasim. (United Press International)

A Tyrant Forty Years in the Making (March 14, 2003)
Roger Morris writes of the "regime change" carried out by the CIA in Iraq forty years ago. Among the CIA's actions were attempted political assassinations and the handing over of a list of suspected communists and leftists that led to the deaths of thousands of Iraqis at the hands of Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath Party. (New York Times)

The Riegle Report (1994)
This report by the Senate Banking Committee analyzes the US's exports of warfare-related goods to Iraq and their possible impact on the health consequences of the Gulf War. The report concludes that the US provided Iraq "with 'dual-use' licensed materials which assisted in the development of Iraqi chemical, biological and missile-system programs." (Gulflink)

In February, Kassem is assassinated by members of the Ba'ath Party and the CIA helps the Ba'athists by providing lists of suspected communists for the party's hit squads, who kill an estimated 800 people. Saddam returns home and rejoins the party as an interrogator, torturer and killer. Nine months later, the army overthrows the Ba'ath Party and Saddam is jailed. He is said to have studied the political tactics of Hitler and Stalin while in prison.

Click to expand...

Once again, nothing from the years 1975-1979 when Saddam actually ascended to power in Iraq.

Amadeus said:

And lets remember that [Saddam was facilitated to power by the US] as [a response to Iran].

Click to expand...

This statement remains factually wrong on two [planes].

Simpleχity;1064480822 said:

Once again, nothing from the years 1975-1979 when Saddam actually ascended to power in Iraq.


This statement remains factually wrong on two [planes].

Click to expand...

I don't know why you continue to deny US involvement in bringing SH to power. And subsequently supporting him throughout the eighties. You think there was a four year period where the US wasn't involved in the internal affairs of Iraq, lol.

Another very good example of a CIA-organized regime change was a coup in 1963 that employed political assassination, mass imprisonment, torture and murder. This was the military coup that first brought Saddam Hussein's beloved Ba'ath Party to power in Iraq. At the time, Richard Helms was Director for Plans at the CIA. That is the top CIA position responsible for covert actions, like organizing coups. Helms served in that capacity until 1966, when he was made Director.

Regime Change: How the CIA put Saddam's Party in Power

Montecresto said:

Saddam Key in Early CIA Plot (April 10, 2003)
According to former US intelligence officials and diplomats, the CIA's relationship with Saddam Hussein dates back to 1959, when he was part of a CIA-authorized six-man squad that attempted to assassinate Iraqi Prime Minister Abd al-Karim Qasim. (United Press International)

A Tyrant Forty Years in the Making (March 14, 2003)
Roger Morris writes of the "regime change" carried out by the CIA in Iraq forty years ago. Among the CIA's actions were attempted political assassinations and the handing over of a list of suspected communists and leftists that led to the deaths of thousands of Iraqis at the hands of Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath Party. (New York Times)

The Riegle Report (1994)
This report by the Senate Banking Committee analyzes the US's exports of warfare-related goods to Iraq and their possible impact on the health consequences of the Gulf War. The report concludes that the US provided Iraq "with 'dual-use' licensed materials which assisted in the development of Iraqi chemical, biological and missile-system programs." (Gulflink)

In February, Kassem is assassinated by members of the Ba'ath Party and the CIA helps the Ba'athists by providing lists of suspected communists for the party's hit squads, who kill an estimated 800 people. Saddam returns home and rejoins the party as an interrogator, torturer and killer. Nine months later, the army overthrows the Ba'ath Party and Saddam is jailed. He is said to have studied the political tactics of Hitler and Stalin while in prison.

Click to expand...

So you feel it's the fault of the Eisenhower, Kennedy and Clinton Administrations? It seems George Bush corrected these earlier errors in judgement.

Montecresto said:

I don't know why you continue to deny US involvement in bringing SH to power. And subsequently supporting him throughout the eighties. You think there was a four year period where the US wasn't involved in the internal affairs of Iraq, lol.

Another very good example of a CIA-organized regime change was a coup in 1963 that employed political assassination, mass imprisonment, torture and murder. This was the military coup that first brought Saddam Hussein's beloved Ba'ath Party to power in Iraq. At the time, Richard Helms was Director for Plans at the CIA. That is the top CIA position responsible for covert actions, like organizing coups. Helms served in that capacity until 1966, when he was made Director.

Regime Change: How the CIA put Saddam's Party in Power

Click to expand...

Saddam didn't come to power in the 60's and was already in power during the 80's.

You're missing the 70's ... when in fact he did come to power.