Adel’s Contradiction
- 02.25.2008 - 10:05 AMAddressing a delegation of Italian parliamentarians during their recent visit to Tehran, Majlis speaker Gholam Ali Haddad Adel commented that “the Islamic Revolution is of no threat to other states and their national security.” But now the Speaker has changed his mind and in an interview to an Iranian newspaper he has said that “the countdown to Israel’s destruction has begun.” (No doubt, among those Europeans who support dialogue with Tehran at all costs, this statement will be interpreted as a sign of moderation–after all, if the Speaker said “Israel,” he must recognizes its existence!) Fools will be fools no matter what, and they’ll accept Adel’s first statement at face value. But for those whose mind still functions, the contradiction should be evidence of two things: Iran’s duplicity and the folly of dialogue with bloodthirsty warmongers.
| »Back to Contentions | »Back to Commentary |
February 25th, 2008 at 10:23 AM
Emanuele, the fools you mention are no doubt mostly leftists. The following virtual dialog is taking place between Jihadists and the Left:
Jihadists: Kill the Jews.
The Left: We understand you. You want an end to settlements on the West Bank.
Jihadists: Kill the Jews.
The Left: Of course. Palestinians should have freedom of movement without checkpoints.
Jihadists: Kill the Jews.
The Left: How poetic your language is. You want a Palestinian state.
Jihadists: Kill the Jews.
February 25th, 2008 at 10:38 AM
I see no contradiction between those two statements. Israel’s destruction is, he feels, inevitable because it is wrong , not because iran plans on starting a war with them.
It’s like saying that rap killed disco. it didn’t physically kill it, it jsut supplanted it.
February 25th, 2008 at 11:12 AM
For lester (and the less, it seems, the better): Huh?
February 25th, 2008 at 11:41 AM
alexander- I admit I was a little confusing there.
my point was that he is is wishing for israel to end, not stating iran is going to attack it or invade it or something. There is no danger of iran doing this.
So, because you hate israel and don’t think it should exist does not contradict the idea that you are committed to peace.
he’s affirming that Iran and israel are rivals, basically.
February 25th, 2008 at 11:44 AM
If I were Israeli, I would be worried. Not panicked, but worried.
The fact that an adversary state’s rulers may be nasty and bloodthirsty is, however, no reason not to talk to them. We talked to Stalin and Mao, after all, who were murderers on a vastly greater scale than the Iranian mullahs.
If you were to say, it’s dangerous to talk to such people with the illusion that sweet reason will solve all the problems that divide us, it would be hard to disagree. Atop a moral high horse, however, is a poor place from which to address strategic matters.
February 25th, 2008 at 11:51 AM
Point taken, lester, except that (a) he’s actively trying to peel away the Europeans and (b) the missile-launching metaphor couldn’t have been more deliberately provocative if it had been coined by Werner von Braun in 1944. . Maybe as a Ph.D. physicist the Speaker (Adel, not Nancy) just likes to use the lingo. Btw, he also married his daughter to one of Khamenei’s sons — love at first sight I’m sure. I think we can reasonably infer that the whole mishpoche has a thing for nuclear warheads.
February 25th, 2008 at 6:57 PM
Well, no threat except for the fact that they did indeed threaten US sovereignty - by storming the embassy and seizing its citizens at the outset of the revolution.
February 25th, 2008 at 8:32 PM
lester:
“countdown” and “destruction” do not suggest passivity in the process, to me. But I agree the statements are not contradictory, but for a different reason: just deny that Israel is a legitimate “nation” and it all fits!