>> ^cracanata:
why is this still a topic?

Because the state-within-a-state that Ahmadinejad and Khameini have built in Iran is a symptom of the same sort of thing. Basiji smashing cars and shops aren't so different from the NSDAP Sturmabteilung smashing jewish shops during the Kristallnacht.

But at least this time they don't have popular support.

The 2007 National Intelligence Estimate on Iran (pdf), the consensus opinion of all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies:
"We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program."

That may be (I don't believe it) but I'm responding to this video where Reza cites the IAEA in 2003.

Citing "U.S. intelligence agencies" doesn't give me a lot of confidence considering they did not in fact know India had nukes (yes they knew they were pursuing them. Germans were pursuing them in WW2. I mean "had nukes" as in they actually had them. Ready to use. It was 1973 when India detonated one to the shock of intelligence communities around the world) .. But of course this is the intelligence apparatus that determined there were WMD's in Iraq.

Shouldn't Israel then as well. Instead of telling the Palestinians what form of existence they should enjoy? I mean honestly you talking about a nation whose power structure was assassinated by the CIA for oil rights brought in a corrupt Shah. Eventually lead to the Islamic revolution. No US dialog has been maintained since. It's like me kicking over someones sand castle and then becoming shocked at their attempt to punch me in the face.

You're changing the whole argument here to something that has nothing to do with this video. Now it's about Israel and Palestine. I know it's America's fault somehow because you mentioned oil and the Shaw. Not sure what is your point though? Does Iran resent and hate us because of the Shaw yet the people in the street now want to engage us and move past that? Bonus points if you can actually make it relate to this video.

Should Israel dial back it's rhetoric of what? That it will defend itself? They are faced with an enemy that is bent on their destruction. Iran. A sovereign state has made it a mandate that they will seek the extinction of this people. That's kind of rude huh? One of the main stumbling blocks for US foreign policy is Israel. Is that because Israel is so fucked up or because there are so many Islamic run regimes that are committed heart and soul to seeing Israel annihilated? Personally, it doesn't matter how you look at it .. they are our allies, and like Britain, Australia, Japan or any of America's trusted friends .. we are bound to defend and support them. It would be a lot easier to turn our back on our allies, but that isn't going to happen.

Is a nuclear armed North Korea? Russia? US? Seems to be alot of tolerance for that there. A state a believe far more willing to put its entire population at nuclear apocalypse.

I actually don't know what that last sentence means. Sorry.
Would the world be better if no one had nukes? Maybe. Will it be better if everyone has nukes? Of course not.

First strike policy is not pursued by any state. Actually, I think that's bullshit. Every nuclear state is trying to develop a first strike plan. We already know such plans exist with "acceptable losses" and such. The good news is M.A.D. has been affective and no one has really figured out an acceptable first strike strategy, yet. The problem is people like money, and what one state uses as a deterrent another emerging state uses as ransom. Iran and other "rogue" states could not actually assure destruction of the US the way the Soviets could during the cold war. So M.A.D. doesn't apply. It's just a threat .. like the Somali pirates. Fear our power. Pay the ransom. Iran (like N. Korea) see nukes as an an extortion tool. A bargaining chip. A chance to wield power and control a spot at the table of world affairs. Some of this is "give in to us or we sell it to others".

We know there are groups out there though that don't fear any retaliation. They don't have a state, don't give a shit if their people live or die because they are on a "mission from God" (sorry Blue's Brothers) .. and those groups buy these technologies from rouge states. So any state emerging with that technology deserves international scrutiny. Obviously.

We can't let every nation on Earth become nuclear states. If you want to argue about the US, Russia, China, etc and other nations that already have them then the only way to solve the problem is to build a time machine. Those nations already have them now and the only way to deal with it is to draw down the numbers of weapons in the stockpiles. Not increase the threat to the entire world by adding new members to the club.

Lastly, I specifically said it was not the Iranian people in general that are the problem, but the hard line psychos in charge. Yet, don't forget there are demonstrations in the streets for Ahmadinejad too. So they say.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'fareed, zakaria, election, iran, fraud, ahmadinejad, moosavi' to 'fareed zakaria, cnn, gps, rigged, election fraud, iran, ahmadinejad, moosavi' - edited by SlipperyPete

Excellently informative post. Thank you.

Sometimes we're vulnerable to accepting one side of a debate unquestioningly without hearing the other side, which is how many people seem to be approaching Reza Aslan's argument.

In reply to this comment by burdturgler:
Was good until around 4:20 but after that Reza is full of shit on many counts.

- It is complete speculation on his part that there is no nuclear weapon ambition or program in Iran. He mentions the IAEA in 2003 but in 2003 the IAEA said the following:

"it is clear that Iran has failed in a number of instances over an extended period of time to meet its obligations under its Safeguards Agreement with respect to the reporting of nuclear material and its processing and use, as well as the declaration of facilities where such material has been processed and stored." (PDF)

Meaning the nuclear material could be stored anywhere and processed for anything. They don't know.

- Saying that the U.S. has taken all military options off the table regarding Iran is complete bullshit. Never happened.

- The C.I.A. has never said that Iran is "many many many years away" from having a nuclear weapon. Regardless, how did the CIA discover that India had nukes? Anyone? They caught them when they were just a year away right? No, the CIA and the rest of Earth found out because India detonated one. Making the argument that Iran isn't pursuing nukes based on the fact that they say so is foolish.

-Israel has nukes. They have had them for decades. To say they are threatening Iran with them is ridiculous. Israel has made no demands from Iran other than to recognize that it is a sovereign nation. The weapons are a deterrent against Iran and the other nations in the region which have said in no uncertain terms that Israel, as a nation state, should not exist.

- Just because some person ("Benny Morris" who is a hero of the Palestinians) wrote an article for the NY Times, does not make it the policy that Israel will launch a nuclear first strike against Iran. That person does not speak for the government of Israel. He doesn't determine the foreign policy of any nation. He does not control or affect in any way Israel's nuclear launch capability. In other words, it's bullshit.

-It has never been the policy of Israel to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike upon anyone unless they were themselves threatened by nukes. That is U.S. policy also. That doesn't mean you can't have a scenario where you strike first. Some people just refuse to understand this. They can not have an enemy on their doorstep that has vowed their destruction to obtain the weapons and strategy needed to carry that threat out. It's just that simple. We didn't allow the missiles in Cuba for the very same reason. Iran needs to dial back it's rhetoric and hate speech and get more in line with the international cooperation and dialog that it's people wants. The type of dialog we all need. Open handed Vs. clenched fist. But that isn't happening and now we see that elections there to make it happen have no meaning.

The hard line psychos in charge of Iran, not the people in general, view Israel as an abomination. They "should be wiped off the face of the map". I've seen this translated as "vanish from time" and several other iterations but however you want to play out the semantics of the translation of that quote from Ahmadinejad the end result is the same. He is echoing and fomenting the sentiment of his supporters .. Israel as a state should not exist. These are the same people who say the Holocaust never happened. Now I've seen some bad comments here, including someone wishing all Christians would die, but I hope most rational people can see this isn't just a religious point of view, it's a wish for genocide. They teach their children that Israeli's are less than human. They are pigs and it is good to slaughter them.

With that ugliness behind me, I will say, it is fun to watch Chris when he has a guest who isn't intimidated, but I don't see where he was "schooled" here. Reza is being naive at best. Iran knows what it's doing. It can't let itself be perceived as the weaker nation. Acquiescing to mandates and sanctions. They want to be a super power. They want to be at the table like India and Pakistan. They know they are close and have decades of work behind them (not in front of them) and will never give up until they have the same strength that is possessed by their perceived aggressors.

There won't be any dialog to stem the tide of a nuclear Iran with the current regime in power.

Does anyone honestly think a nuclear armed Iran is a viable option for world stability and peace?

>> ^ElJardinero:
"If anything it serves as a testament to the fact that not every person from Iran is a bomb-strapped nutbag as they are often characterized. "
... iranian suicide bombers?
Where? When?


Exactly. Therein lies the deep misperception that we in the West hold.

In fact, among the Twitter feeds that I've been following of Iranians on the streets of Tehran, many are quite concerned themselves that the Hezbollah mercenaries that Ahmadinejad has hired as riot police will unleash suicide attacks.

Was good until around 4:20 but after that Reza is full of shit on many counts.

- It is complete speculation on his part that there is no nuclear weapon ambition or program in Iran. He mentions the IAEA in 2003 but in 2003 the IAEA said the following:

"it is clear that Iran has failed in a number of instances over an extended period of time to meet its obligations under its Safeguards Agreement with respect to the reporting of nuclear material and its processing and use, as well as the declaration of facilities where such material has been processed and stored." (PDF)

Meaning the nuclear material could be stored anywhere and processed for anything. They don't know.

- Saying that the U.S. has taken all military options off the table regarding Iran is complete bullshit. Never happened.

- The C.I.A. has never said that Iran is "many many many years away" from having a nuclear weapon. Regardless, how did the CIA discover that India had nukes? Anyone? They caught them when they were just a year away right? No, the CIA and the rest of Earth found out because India detonated one. Making the argument that Iran isn't pursuing nukes based on the fact that they say so is foolish.

-Israel has nukes. They have had them for decades. To say they are threatening Iran with them is ridiculous. Israel has made no demands from Iran other than to recognize that it is a sovereign nation. The weapons are a deterrent against Iran and the other nations in the region which have said in no uncertain terms that Israel, as a nation state, should not exist.

- Just because some person ("Benny Morris" who is a hero of the Palestinians) wrote an article for the NY Times, does not make it the policy that Israel will launch a nuclear first strike against Iran. That person does not speak for the government of Israel. He doesn't determine the foreign policy of any nation. He does not control or affect in any way Israel's nuclear launch capability. In other words, it's bullshit.

-It has never been the policy of Israel to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike upon anyone unless they were themselves threatened by nukes. That is U.S. policy also. That doesn't mean you can't have a scenario where you strike first. Some people just refuse to understand this. They can not have an enemy on their doorstep that has vowed their destruction to obtain the weapons and strategy needed to carry that threat out. It's just that simple. We didn't allow the missiles in Cuba for the very same reason. Iran needs to dial back it's rhetoric and hate speech and get more in line with the international cooperation and dialog that it's people wants. The type of dialog we all need. Open handed Vs. clenched fist. But that isn't happening and now we see that elections there to make it happen have no meaning.

The hard line psychos in charge of Iran, not the people in general, view Israel as an abomination. They "should be wiped off the face of the map". I've seen this translated as "vanish from time" and several other iterations but however you want to play out the semantics of the translation of that quote from Ahmadinejad the end result is the same. He is echoing and fomenting the sentiment of his supporters .. Israel as a state should not exist. These are the same people who say the Holocaust never happened. Now I've seen some bad comments here, including someone wishing all Christians would die, but I hope most rational people can see this isn't just a religious point of view, it's a wish for genocide. They teach their children that Israeli's are less than human. They are pigs and it is good to slaughter them.

With that ugliness behind me, I will say, it is fun to watch Chris when he has a guest who isn't intimidated, but I don't see where he was "schooled" here. Reza is being naive at best. Iran knows what it's doing. It can't let itself be perceived as the weaker nation. Acquiescing to mandates and sanctions. They want to be a super power. They want to be at the table like India and Pakistan. They know they are close and have decades of work behind them (not in front of them) and will never give up until they have the same strength that is possessed by their perceived aggressors.

There won't be any dialog to stem the tide of a nuclear Iran with the current regime in power.

Does anyone honestly think a nuclear armed Iran is a viable option for world stability and peace?

^It didn't change, Andrew Sullivan (&gwiz) interpreted the sentence "The Presidency of the Council of the EU closely followed the course of the Presidential elections held on 12 June 2009 and notices Mr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was re-elected" to mean they acknowledge his victory.

Mousavi is going to march in about half an hour. There have been rumors that the march was cancelled, but this was misinformation by the government. "#iranElection" on twitter and the "IRAN" group on facebook remain best sources of information. The mainstream media really dropped the ball on this one, and their headlines are a couple of hours or more behind, and not entirely reliable.

Nice work on gathering all these clips!
These riots need to reach some critical mass soon, or nothing will change. Iran needs another revolution. Ahmadinejad is the one who gives Iran such a bad name, most inside documentaries I've seen portray the Iranians themselves as very reasonable people.

>> ^liverpoolfc:
Excellent way to win a battle of ideas, walk away because you don't like what you're hearing... how can we expect others (the ones we want to convince we're right and they are wrong) to listen us when we aren't prepared to listen them regardless of whether it is even possible to reason with them. It sets a bad example...


The thing is, we HAVE listened to them, we've argued with them and evidence IS still with us. This wasn't a debate, it was a speech and I completely stand by anyone who walked out on the basis that a lot of what he is spouting is deeply and simply sectarian. It's been heard before and it's as wrong now as it was then.

>> ^Farhad2000:
>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^Farhad2000:
More importantly still why can't a conference about stopping racism be held WITHOUT national leaders needing to single out a single nation that is nearly 80% Jewish?

Jews are not a race. They are a ethnoreligious group.
What you said could mean that anti-Christian rhetoric can be considered racist because its leveled against Christians.


You do realize that an entire working group for the Durban agreement being discussed here was dedicated to preventing discrimination against Islam?

And to point out the obvious, the distinction between ethno-religious group and race does NOT justify discrimination against the Jewish people. To even discuss something like whether the holocaust was committed against the Jewish race or merely the Jewish people is to miss the point entirely!

>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^Farhad2000:
More importantly still why can't a conference about stopping racism be held WITHOUT national leaders needing to single out a single nation that is nearly 80% Jewish?


Jews are not a race. They are a ethnoreligious group.

What you said could mean that anti-Christian rhetoric can be considered racist because its leveled against Christians.

>> ^Irishman:
So he denies the holocaust happened, doesn't that make him as fucking sick and twisted and corrupt and crazy as every single person on this planet in charge of a country?


No! worse!

i totally support Jonas Gahr Støres way of dealing with the situation. He was the speaker after Ahmadinejad

>> ^Farhad2000:
Ahmadinejad is the worst kind of person to transmit this kind of information. What Israel does is inexcusable, but he is not the right person to be allowed to say this because it totally detracts from the case with his political background with regards to this issue.
But then again its been over 60 years and miles of lines have been written about this and nothing has been done. Israel seeds it's own destruction in the long run.


More importantly still why can't a conference about stopping racism be held WITHOUT national leaders needing to single out a single nation that is nearly 80% Jewish?

Ahmadinejad is the worst kind of person to transmit this kind of information. What Israel does is inexcusable, but he is not the right person to be allowed to say this because it totally detracts from the case with his political background with regards to this issue.

But then again its been over 60 years and miles of lines have been written about this and nothing has been done. Israel seeds it's own destruction in the long run.