INTERVIEW WITH IRAN'S PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD - very emotional in some parts

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by Arnie, Jun 1, 2006.

  1. #1
    Hence how he doesn't answer questions clearly when it comes to the point.


    SPIEGEL: The key question is: Do you want nuclear weapons for your country?
    Ahmadinejad: Allow me to encourage a discussion on the following question: How long do you think the world can be governed by the rhetoric of a handful of Western powers? Whenever they hold something against someone, they start spreading propaganda and lies, defamation and blackmail. How much longer can that go on?
    SPIEGEL: We're here to find out the truth. The head of state of a neighboring country, for example, told SPIEGEL: "They are very keen on building the bomb." Is that true?
    Ahmadinejad: You see, we conduct our discussions with you and the European governments on an entirely different, higher level. In our view, the legal system whereby a handful of countries force their will on the rest of the world is discriminatory and unstable. One-hundred and thirty-nine countries, including us, are members of the International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA) in Vienna. Both the statutes of IAEA and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as well as all security agreements grant the member countries the right to produce nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes. That is the legitimate legal right of any people. Beyond this, however, IAEA was also established to promote the disarmament of those powers that already possessed nuclear weapons. And now look at what's happening today: Iran has had an excellent cooperation with IAEA. We have had more than 2,000 inspections of our plants, and the inspectors have obtained more than 1,000 pages of documentation from us. Their cameras are installed in our nuclear centers. IAEA has emphasized in all its reports that there are no indications of any irregularities in Iran. That is one side of this matter.
    SPIEGEL: IAEA doesn't quite share your view of this matter.
    Ahmadinejad: But the other side is that there are a number of countries that possess both nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. They use their atomic weapons to threaten other peoples. And it is these powers who say that they are worried about Iran deviating from the path of peaceful use of atomic energy. We say that these powers are free to monitor us if they are worried. But what these powers say is that the Iranians must not complete the nuclear fuel cycle because deviation from peaceful use might then be possible. What we say is that these countries themselves have long deviated from peaceful usage. These powers have no right to talk to us in this manner. This order is unjust and unsustainable.
    SPIEGEL: But, Mr. President, the key question is: How dangerous will this world become if even more countries become nuclear powers -- if a country like Iran, whose president makes threats, builds the bomb in a crisis-ridden region?
    Ahmadinejad: We're fundamentally opposed to the expansion of nuclear-weapons arsenals. This is why we have proposed the formation of an unbiased organization and the disarmament of the nuclear powers. We don't need any weapons. We're a civilized, cultured people, and our history shows that we have never attacked another country.
    SPIEGEL: Iran doesn't need the bomb that it wants to build?
    Ahmadinejad: It's interesting to note that European nations wanted to allow the shah's dictatorship the use of nuclear technology. That was a dangerous regime. Yet those nations were willing to supply it with nuclear technology. Ever since the Islamic Republic has existed, however, these powers have been opposed to it. I stress once again, we don't need any nuclear weapons.
    We stand by our statements because we're honest and act legally. We're no fraudsters. We only want to claim our legitimate right. Incidentally, I never threatened anyone - that, too, is part of the propaganda machine that you've got running against me.
    SPIEGEL: If this were so, shouldn't you be making an effort to ensure that no one need fear your producing nuclear weapons that you might use against Israel, thus possibly unleashing a world war? You're sitting on a tinderbox, Mr. President.
    Ahmadinejad: Allow me to say two things. No people in the region are afraid of us. And no one should instill fear in these peoples. We believe that if the United States and these two or three European countries did not interfere, the peoples in this region would live peacefully together as they did in the thousands of years before. In 1980, it was also the nations of Europe and the United States that encouraged Saddam Hussein to attack us.
    Our stance with respect to Palestine is clear. We say: Allow those to whom this country belongs to express their opinion. Let Jews, Christians and Muslims say what they think. The opponents of this proposal prefer war and threaten the region. Why are the United States and these two or three European nations opposed to this? I believe that those who imprison Holocaust researchers prefer war to peace. Our stance is democratic and peaceful.
    SPIEGEL: The Palestinians have long gone a step further than you and recognize Israel as a fact, while you still wish to erase it from the map. The Palestinians are ready to accept a two-state solution while you deny Israel its right to existence.
    Ahmadinejad: You're wrong. You saw that the Palestinian people elected Hamas in free elections. We argue that neither you nor we should claim to speak for the Palestian people. The Palestinians themselves should say what they want. In Europe it is customary to call a referendum on any issue. We should also give the Palestinians the opportunity to express their opinion.

    Read it all of the emotional interview here
     
    Arnie, Jun 1, 2006 IP
  2. moq

    moq Guest

    Messages:
    352
    Likes Received:
    10
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #2
    Good job, where did u get these details from!
     
    moq, Jun 1, 2006 IP
  3. suzigeek

    suzigeek Peon

    Messages:
    142
    Likes Received:
    5
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #3
    OMG I can't believe this guy still is implicating the holocaust wasn't a fact...

    Lets see My father faught in WWII and saw a camp release...where those people all actors....One of my good childhood friends mother was in a camp w/tattoos to prove it...did she make it all up...my mothers neighbor is a polish concetration camp survivor with numbers to show also...she's a fraudster too!!

    He almost sounds rational until it comes to the holocuast then his true colors show...How can someone like this come too power?? The world needs better education worldwide so people can see beyond the ignorance. UG
     
    suzigeek, Jun 1, 2006 IP
  4. latehorn

    latehorn Guest

    Messages:
    4,676
    Likes Received:
    238
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #4
    I read your post on a mirror page 2 days ago, unfortunally I couldn't answer due to a stupid ban. However I also read the rest of the article and my conclusions is that..

    I am dissapointet at Der Spiegel for making such a clumsy interview with one of the worlds most dangerous men. The journalists are speaking like they are some avarage dumb political analysers instead of interviewers.

    This is what really pisses me off is this
    It seems like they think that US has already been pushed backed from Iraq by the Baath Party and have been loosing 10.000 troops everyday. However, the most deadly days where the days of Fallujah which happened back in 2004 when they loosed 125 men in one month. However the number might sound small but actually since the number of deaths of US troops has actually decreased in Iraq the latest years and the first months of 2006 have pathetical low numbers around 50.

    Here's some historical data about fatalities of US troops in Iraq:
    So the number decrease with the time, hence US is winning the war!

    Apart from that, this is journalistic on it's lowest levels, Ahmadinejad won this agrumentation according to me.
     
    latehorn, Jun 3, 2006 IP
  5. Arnie

    Arnie Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,004
    Likes Received:
    116
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    #5
    I don't agree on that.

    Maybe it sounds a little bit hard to say that America has defacto lost the war, but it helped to build up the trust during the interview and therefore showing and confirming more of this guys character and goals.

    This interview is to be read between the lines, thats where the truth is.
    If you try this you will find out that this guy never has the intention not to build nukes. It is another proof for their intention to build the nuke though not directly spoken, and that what counts most important not to denounce it. He just mentioned that they not need it ... blah, blah, blah ...

    Where do you see a victory of his arguments.

    I can't see it.
     
    Arnie, Jun 3, 2006 IP
  6. latehorn

    latehorn Guest

    Messages:
    4,676
    Likes Received:
    238
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #6
    If the goal was to build up trust, how come that Der SPIEGEL tries to speak for the authority in the first part of the message?
    However, apart from that, I think the article make more sense now from that perspective. However, I would like a longer and more serious interview next time.

    Actually, if this about Iran building nuclear weapons is new to anyone, I feel sorry for them.

    In the end of the first page etc..
     
    latehorn, Jun 3, 2006 IP
  7. lorien1973

    lorien1973 Notable Member

    Messages:
    12,206
    Likes Received:
    601
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    260
    #7
    I am sure Spiegel was told a frame of the conversation and they had to stick within it. Why would this guy agree to an interview without any boundaries? Some of the questions (particularly the defacto defeat one) were insanely stupid and sounded like he was giving the guy a handjob instead of an interview. He didn't get anything out of the guy.
     
    lorien1973, Jun 3, 2006 IP
  8. Arnie

    Arnie Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,004
    Likes Received:
    116
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    #8
    I do understand you emotions about some questions like the 'defacto defeat one', but then again, it is not a diplomatic interview but an emotional one.

    The cause could well be that the Germans are excusing themselves for their own shortcomings about the Iraq issue.

    Time will reveal that the decision to go into Iraq was a right one, regardless of mistakes made - from whatever side.
    Now Germany is willing and ready to help solving the issue over Iran with whatever it takes.

    I'm personally welcoming the step taken to offer them incentives that will prove and show the real face of Iran beyound doubts. And I guess that the American policy will be emerging as the moral winner. Even China and Russia are closer to approve sanctions than ever before.
     
    Arnie, Jun 3, 2006 IP
  9. Arnie

    Arnie Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,004
    Likes Received:
    116
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    #9
    Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said.

    "Nuclear weapons have no place in Iran's military and defense doctrine," he said, adding that "nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction are obstacles to international peace and security."


    Of course, he's right.
    They don't want to store it, but use it to wipe out Israel and some other nations, it's called offensive and not defensive. They also have long range missiles for defence.
    After then they want to create the kalifat's peace, or as they think might be peace for them.

    Interesting in how skilled they are to lie without feeling ashamed and thinking to be able to blind the world.
    Ah, of course, they are not allowed to lie and in fact he didn't, just pretending for peace.
     
    Arnie, Jun 4, 2006 IP
  10. latehorn

    latehorn Guest

    Messages:
    4,676
    Likes Received:
    238
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #10
    I can think of 2 ways how Iran will defeat zionism.

    1. With nuke(s). Making a parkinglot of Tel Aviv/Haifa.
    2. With nuke(s). Not using the nukes in real, just as a threat and sponsor terrorism in Israel and mayby also in any country that recognize it.
     
    latehorn, Jun 4, 2006 IP