Quote of the Day

From Liss at Shakesville:

Don’t get me wrong: I don’t want Iran having any nukes for multiple reasons, but mostly because I don’t want anyone having any nukes. But I remain consistently amazed that the leadership of countries with nuclear weaponry expect other countries to be okay with that power imbalance.

Yeah, I’ve always been a bit confused about that also.


  1. How is it confusing? Why would we want our enemies with a history of aggressive wars and support of terrorism to have the most powerful weapons in the world? I’m sorry its not “fair” but screw them. And I don’t need any grief about how “we’re the only nation to use them” either. Frankly we should have them to protect ourselves, they want them so they can filter weapons to terrorists to fight their proxy wars against the Jews and the west. Or simply to sell them to other rouge powers.

  2. So, according to liberal thinking, there is no such thing as responsible stewardship of nukes. If civilized countries can have them, so should the 9th century religious fundamentalist batshit crazies.

    You know, the ones who repeatedly declare their intentions to wipe Israel off the map.

    Makes sense.

  3. joeypeeps: if your criteria of why a country shouldn’t have nukes is “a history of aggressive wars and support of terrorism”, then the USA should definitely not have them.

  4. I’m kind of confused why the same people who were for nuclear disarmament 20 years ago – even had a roommate who strapped himself to a nuclear submarine – are now thinking everyone should have a good bomb. Don’t get it.

  5. I believe Ahmadinejad said at one time that he was in favor of a “nuclear-free Middle East.” He would not need a bomb if there weren’t ones in Israel. And Pakistan. And India. He’s surrounded.

  6. Hm, high stantard of analysis in this thread! I particularly love the way a statement beginning ‘Don’t get me wrong: I don’t want Iran having any nukes’ gets parleyed into ‘everyone should have a good bomb’. Good stuff, guys. Well done.

  7. Oh poor Ahmadinejad, his bastion of freedom, equity for all and democracy feels threatened. I would feel bad for him if he wasn’t a sabre rattling blowhard who would sell a nuke to any extremist who would fullfill his dream of Israel being “wiped off the map”

  8. OK, explained slowly for the conservatives:

    1. Nobody wants Iran to get the bomb.

    2. It should not surprise anybody that Iran wants the bomb.

    3. Pointing out that Iran wants the bomb is not the same thing as wanting Iran to have the bomb.

    I don’t know why I bother, but there it is.

  9. @ Inti, you beat me to it damn you! I mean good point!

    It never seems aggressive, malicious or groundless when you’re the one doing it.

    That holds true for Iran every bit as much as America.

  10. Ahmadinejad never said he wanted Israel wiped off the map. I’m sure he has that sentiment, but he never stated it publicly. His words were twisted by the American/European media into that statement. I’m not supporting Ahmadinejad, I’m just saying that your news sources bend things, be they “right wing” or “left wing”, to a pro-Europe/America slant.

  11. Red Daughter,

    January 23, 2007:
    During meeting with Syria’s foreign minister. U.S. and Israel “will soon come to the end of their lives.” Y Net News

    December 20, 2006:
    Declared that Britain, Israel, and the U.S. would disappear like the Egyptian pharoahs. Iran Focus

    December 12, 2006:
    2nd day of Iran’s infamous Holocaust (denial) conference in Tehran. Said that Israel “will be wiped out soon.” Jerusalem Post

    December 1, 2006:
    Doha, Qatar. Israel “on the verge of disappearing.” Jerusalem Post

    November 13, 2006:
    At council meeting with Iranian ministers. Declares Iran “will soon witness [Israel’s] disappearance and destruction.” Y Net News

    October 19, 2006:
    Called Israel the “greatest insult to human dignity.” Said Israel must be removed from the Middle East and called the Holocaust a “fairy tale.” M&C News

    August 3, 2006:
    Said the solution to Middle East crisis is the destruction of Israel. Speech during “emergency meeting” of Muslim leaders in Putrajaya, Malaysia Washington Post

    May 11, 2006:
    In Jakarta, Indonesia: Said the “evil regime” of Israel will soon be “annihilated.” Iran Focus

    April 15, 2006:
    At opening of conference supporting the “Palestinians”. “Like it or not, the Zionist regime is heading toward annihilation . . . . The Zionist regime is a rotten, dried tree that will be eliminated by one storm.” Said that “existence of this (Israeli) regime is a permanent threat” to the Middle East, and that “[i]ts existence has harmed the dignity of Islamic nations.”

    February 11, 2006:
    In Tehran: Palestine and “other nations” will remove Israel from the Middle East. Holocaust is a “fairy tale.” Warns that “harsh” measures against Iran’s nuclear program will result in Iran walking away from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Bangkok Post World Net Daily

    December 14, 2005:
    Suggested the Jews be relocated to Alaska. Turkish Weekly

    December 8, 2005: Interview with Iranian state television’s satellite channel Al-Alam. Referred to Israel as a “tumor” and suggested it be relocated to Europe; also questioned the Holocaust. “If somebody in their country questions God, nobody says anything, but if somebody denies the myth of the massacre of Jews, the ‘Zionist’ loudspeakers and the governments in the pay of ‘Zionism’ will start to scream.” Turkish Weekly

    October 26, 2005, speaking at the “World Without Zionism” conference in Tehran: “As the Imam [Ayatollah Khomeini] said, Israel must be wiped off the map.” And: “The Islamic [community] will not allow its historic enemy to live in its heartland . . . . anyone who signs a treaty which recognizes the entity of Israel means that he has signed the surrender of the Muslim world.” Al Jazeera ”There is no doubt that the new wave in Palestine will soon wipe off this disgraceful blot from the face of the world.” Anyone who recognizes Israel “will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation’s fury.” Jinsa Online

  12. The U.S., China, Russia, India, etc. have the bomb. Nothing can be done to change that. It’s a fact of life. Trying to convince (prevent) others from joining that group doesn’t sound bad to me. There are far too many of those devices around as it is. However, if I heard that a country like Finland was developing nuclear capabilities I wouldn’t lose much sleep. Iran is controlled by people that give me nightmares.

  13. I stand corrected, though I have to point out that almost all of those quotes come from sources critical of Iran, many of them Israeli. I’m not saying I don’t believe you now, I do; but it sort of harms the objectivity of it.
    Personally, I oppose Ahmadinejad because he’s a reactionary in Iran, opposing imperialism isn’t enough for me to support someone.

  14. The dynamics of nuclear arms control are interesting. Everyone agrees that a nuclear stand-off or deterrence among superpowers is a good thing. Likewise, in the the case of historical rivals like Pakistan and India, there was little chance that Pakistan would have resisted answering India’s capabilities. If we turn back the clock, we could understand Iran’s desire to keep pace with rival Iraq’s development. Now, it is tough for Iran to make a good case for nukes in the absence of a credible threat. What isn’t talked about very much is the tacit support of Israel by states such as Saudi Arabia. While they have attempted to buy off the radicals for decades, they have been comforted by a strong Israel.

  15. TankMan: That’s quite an impressive list you’ve got there, and judging from its length, well, you obviously must be correct, so let me apologize on behalf of all us doubters – NOT! Why no links for some independent verification? Could it be that your impressive list wouldn’t hold up to scrutiny? Saying that something’s so doesn’t make it so, even when you dress it up as a list of “references”.

  16. “… I remain consistently amazed that the leadership of countries with nuclear weaponry expect other countries to be okay with that power imbalance.”

    They don’t really expect them to be ok with it. It’s completely disingenuous. They pretend to expect it, so as to justify the policy to their own populations. This unreasonable expectation is made to seem reasonable through the demonization of the foreign people and culture, in concert with the glorification of the native people and culture.

    So we have the argument: Yah, but they’re evil/unreasonable/crazy and we’re good/reasonable/sane.

  17. TankMan doth quotz:

    > During meeting with Syria’s foreign minister.
    > U.S. and Israel “will soon come to the end
    > of their lives.” Y Net News

    … is from here:


    … where it is also written:

    “… Ahmadinejad has threatened the State of Israel with annihilation…”

    … which leads to here:


    … and this:

    “… Ahmadinejad further noted the frequent failure of the plots of the hegemonic system in the Middle-East region, and said that the demise of the US and Zionist regime is imminent…”

    Regime => government

    He is predicting that the governments will come to an end. In every U.S. election roughly 50% of those voting predict, hope for, the demise of the current regime. Get it? Which proves that “Y Net newz” article is a fabrication and complete distortion of the facts. Which puts the entire TankMan list in question and to be assumed just as bogus.

    This is a classic tactic of spreading misinformation. Bombard with a plethora of pseudo quotes (quotz) and pseudo references (refrenzez) ala the “faux newz networkz” technique, hoping that no one will actually check. After all, who would post such a long list of distortions? It certainly looks like they’ve done they’re homework. It must be all true.

    Don’t fall for it.

Comments are closed.