Image via Wikipedia
Dec 3, 2012 by AlJazeeraEnglish
The financial sanctions on Iran are now having a real impact. Earlier this week, people in Tehran openly complained that the Iranian currency is drastically losing value against the dollar, pushing up prices. Meanwhile, Iran’s leadership is already dealing with a threat from Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli leader, who delivered a strong speech at the United Nations against the Iranian nuclear programme. There is also the situation in Syria, where Iran’s relationship with the Assad regime is forcing the Iranian leadership to take sides. And then there is Egypt: A new leader, President Morsi, is changing the geopolitical landscape. Is this an opening for Iran? We sat down with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran’s president, in New York, to discuss where things stand and where we are headed.
see
What do they want from Syria? by Finian Cunningham
IAEA Data on Sensitive Iranian Stockpile Mislead News Media by Gareth Porter
A Deadly Déjà Vu–Operation Pillar of Cloud by Clive Hambidge
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s Speech at the United Nations + Transcript Sept. 26, 2012
Filed under: Ahmadinejad-Mahmoud, Anti-war, Dandelion Salad Posts News Politics and-or Videos 2, Dandelion Salad Videos, Iran, Iran on Dandelion Salad, Israel, Israel-Palestine-Gaza-Occupation, Politics, Syria Tagged: | Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Syria on Dandelion Salad
[...] Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: You Can’t Rule With War [...]
The single threefold question that is never resolved is this ~ what is the relationship of Zionism to Islam; is the State of Israel hostile to Moslems; does Israel oppose Islam?
If the answer is yes, then it clearly suits them to foment Sunni/Shiah division and there will never be any possibility of a sustainable commonwealth in the ancient Levant.
Israel must either “fit” into an Islamic commonwealth of nations of the Middle-east, or will forever undermine it. There is no way out of this dilemma. Once it is squared, then we can talk more intelligently about Islamic reforms, and even consider the merits of the arguments framed by the “Bernard Lewis doctrine.”
Is Israel potentially a civilizing influence and benign constitutional presence, or a global liability? Surely, the answer depends upon whether we listen to the moderates ~ the more intellectually acute, spiritually motivated and culturally enlightened ~ or the extremists; who only understand violence.
War comprises complex elements of subtler dimensions than outright barbarism and destruction, as Sun Zi pointed out many centuries ago.
How different it would be, if our western strategic thinking were motivated by more imaginative criteria.
Anthony Sampson in his epochal account of the global “Arms Bazaar” in 1983, describes how a single fighter jet cost as much to build as a small hospital.
If we had a real choice, which of these would any sane human being prefer? Are they even commensurable?