September 26, 2007
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (John Feehery)
Now that the president of Iran is nearing the end of his whirlwind tour of the Big Apple, what have we learned?
Well, from the president of Columbia University, we have learned that Ahmadinejad is a “petty and cruel tyrant."
From some Columbia students, we have learned that he is another Hitler.
From Ahmadinejad himself, we learned that there are no homosexuals in Iran, and that women are treated well in his society.
All of these assertions are, of course, patently ridiculous. To be a dictator of any kind, you need to be actually running the country. Ahmadinejad is little more than a figurehead. Iran is run by a bunch of conservative Muslim clerics, who publicly want to take Iran back to the 15th century, but privately are doing their best to steal all the money they can before the country goes bankrupt.
To say that he is another Hitler is also ridiculous. Hitler had at his disposal the most feared military in history. Iran doesn’t. Ahmadinejad may be a Holocaust denier, but that doesn’t make him another Hitler.
And what can you say about the assertions of the crazy loon from Tehran? Really, you just have to shake your head and laugh, and many did at Columbia University.
We should resist the temptation to make the Iranian president look like the next Saddam Hussein. He doesn’t run Iran. He is for all intents and purposes a joke, even to his own people.
Instead we should have a simple three-part message to the folks who really run Iran. Stop killing our troops in Iraq or face the consequences. Don’t even think about building nuclear weapons (the French even agree with us on that one). And the 15th century is really overrated — come join us in the 21st.
Forget Ahmadinejad. Focus on the clerics.
8 Comments
»
The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
He may be a joke, and he may be a liar, but he is more honest than Hitlery Clinton in his own way. For further info see my blog.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — September 26, 2007 @ 9:35 am
It may not be so rediculous to refer to Ahmadinejad as another "another Hitler". If I'm not mistaken, at one time hitler was a corporal in the german army. Give this quy a few years and who knows what he will become. One things for sure, he had better be taken seriously by the US. We're going to have to deal with Iran, like it or not. I hope all the presidental candidates realize that fact. A deal with the devil never works.
Comment by Ron H. — September 26, 2007 @ 2:19 pm
Thanks Robert. Brilliant! you know some doctors in DC? You should visit one soon.
Comment by Chris Calbi — September 26, 2007 @ 3:47 pm
The time for normal messages is over. It's abundantly clear that the mullahs don't respond to pressure that's not a matter of life and death, and in fact it's not clear whether collectively they respond to any pressure. I also don't believe that toppling them through a rebellion is a goal that has any knowable chance of success within a reasonable period of time. The only message that needs to be delivered is the elimination of the entire power structure and the military.
Comment by Igor R. — September 26, 2007 @ 4:39 pm
Whether he has all of power or if the small group of mullahs behind him have all the power, it really is one and the same thing. Would you sleep better at night knowing that this guy and his buddies have an atom bomb? The world may say that we don't want Iran to get nuclear weapons, but are we doing that much to stop them? We underestimate our enemies at our own risk.
Comment by Libertyship46 — September 26, 2007 @ 5:23 pm
Sorry, it won't work. The US can't have Supreme leader Khamanei, Iran's actual Head of State, as a bogeyman. Even though the US is on a grand crusade against Islam, and specifically Iran, the enemy must be secular because the ostensible reason for the crusade is for secular reasons, i.e. power and profit.
Example: Japan. The enemy was not Emperor Hirohito, it was Tojo. I say stick with Ahmy as the designated enemy. Cruel and petty dictator or loony bufoon, pick your own reason and bombs away.
I'll sleep better at night if I know we've started WWIII–the winger up there said so and look how right they were on Iraq. Losers.
Comment by Don Bacon — September 26, 2007 @ 8:40 pm
Chris, why are you questioning Robert's sanity? To a home audience, Ahmadinejad is COMPLETELY honest, with one exception: he doesn't quite admit that he wants the bomb! While he muddies things up a little bit to an unfriendly audience, it's not by a lot. When he is speaking to adoring fans, he says what he means and means what he says about the elimination of Israel, the end of the world being near and the arrival of the Mahdi, the world without America, suppression of dissent. Just like Hitler, he is understandably a little vague about tactics, but clear about strategy. The main problem, just like in that case, the world doesn't take him seriously enough.
Contrast it with Hillary: lying about Hsu (her campaign was warned during the summer but she is SO surprised by the turn of events), lying or constantly saying different things about her Iraq strategy, ordering her college thesis suppressed for years to hide her real leanings, adopting the accent of her audience, coming to various Sunday shows and greeting difficult questions with witch-like laughter, a seeming misdirection tactic, accusing Petraeus of requiring suspension of disbelief while almost immediately re-asserting her belief in his honor.
We know where Ahmadenijad stands. Can the same really be said about Hillary?
Comment by Igor R. — September 26, 2007 @ 9:06 pm
Chris Calbi: Thanks for admitting you're one of my biggest fans. The real question is, why don't you have anything to offer of your own. You simply attack other posters without offering any thoughts of your own.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — September 27, 2007 @ 12:31 pm