Saturday, December 05, 2009

Iran will be a nuclear power ‘by the grace of God’

Well, it depends on whose god, what you mean by grace, and also, come to think of it, what you mean by nuclear power.

But this is not a moment for hermeneutical levity.

President Ahmadinejad appears to be talking about something rather more significant than a nuclear power station. He is intent on enriching uranium to a much higher level than that required to produce electricity, and ‘experts’ are persuaded that he is ‘on the road to making the material needed to arm a warhead within months’.

The President is doing nothing to allay the concerns. He said: “I declare here that with the grace of God, the Iranian nation will produce 20 percent fuel and anything it needs itself."

The ‘and anything it needs itself’ is a bit of a giveaway.

Superfluity is as rife in Tehran as it is in Washington, but if President Obama can reason the need, who is he to tell President Ahmadinejad that he may not?

There is no doubt that Iran has a nuclear ‘programme’, and it is becoming increasingly evident that they are enriching uranium to a degree that could be used in nuclear warheads.

Some 33-66 pounds (15-30kg) of uranium enriched to levels above 90 per cent are needed to produce a nuclear bomb. It is reported that Iran currently has around 3,300 pounds (1,500kg) of 3.5 per cent, or low-enriched uranium — enough to produce highly enriched material for two such weapons.

Cranmer is not at atomic physicist. But he is concerned that no-one appears to be concerned that President Ahmadinejad is just a few months away from being able to fulfil the prophetic purpose for which he believes he has been divinely chosen. In his comments this week, he indicated that Iran was ready for ‘heightened confrontation’, saying it was no longer ready to negotiate with the international community over the enrichment plan or any other aspects of its nuclear program. “You should know that even if you sizzle... the Iranian nation won't talk to you concerning the nuclear issue," he said.


That appears to be what President Ahmadinejad has in mind for the nation of Israel.

He is a devotee of the Hidden Imam, the Messiah-like figure of Shi’a Islam, and he believes that his government must prepare the country for his return. All streams of Islam believe in a divine saviour, known as the Mahdi, who will appear at the End of Days in the company of Isa (Jesus). But President Ahmadinejad and his cabinet have pledged themselves to work for the return of the Mahdi. Indeed, his military involvement in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq is purposely designed to agitate against Israel to hasten the Last Day. Iran's dominant ‘Twelver’ sect believes the Mahdi will be Mohammed ibn Hasan, regarded as the 12th Imam and descendant of the Prophet Mohammed.

Iran is a theocracy driven by Shi’a theology which is guarded by clerics who ensure that all legislation complies with their interpretation of Islamic law. And when it comes to foreign policy, this can only mean one thing for Israel, for they hold to the divine promise made in the Al-Israa Sura (Sura 17) that they will liberate the Al-Aqsa Mosque - the first 'Kaba' to the Muslims - and will enter it as they have entered it the first time (Sura 17, ayat 7). And the prophetic foundation is the message of Mohammad that Islam will enter every house and will spread over the entire world.

They are dedicated and pledged with their lives to the ‘liberation of Palestine’ - all of Palestine.

This is Iran’s final solution.

Shouldn’t we be just a little more concerned that they are on the brink of acquiring a nuclear bomb?


Blogger Maturecheese said...

Your Grace,

I can't see Israel waiting until Iran have the capability to launch a nuclear warhead against them. I think Israel will attack Irans nuclear infrastructure soon as they really don't have any choice. The ramifications of that will be immense of course but not as bad as allowing a nuclear strike on Israel.

5 December 2009 at 10:23  
Blogger The Anti Christ said...

I personally find this all very exciting.

"Should we be concerned" Dinner Jacket knows full well that y'all have not the capacity. Nowhere will you see or hear of anything remotely like it on Eastenders, The X Factor, Coronation Street, I am a Moron get Me out Of Here, Big Brother, Question Time, and many of the other dumbed down TV mind wash.

I can't wait for it to kick off. It will of course play hell with the markets, poor Frazer Nelson will be pumping pie charts and graphs out at Coffee House like there is no tomorrow (excuse the pun).

5 December 2009 at 10:53  
Anonymous William said...

In today's political world the following will happen.

1. US & EU say to Iran don't enrich or else
2. Iran ignores US & EU and proceeds
3. Israel try to get US & EU to do something knowing if they did they'd be hung out to dry
4. US & EU make soothing noises to Israel and tut tut at Iran saying don't or else
5. Iran carries on enriching
6. Israel will try to launch pre-emptive strike
7. World tells Israel off
8. Iran nukes Tel Aviv
9. World turns back on Israel as it's fed to the wolves
10. World appeases Iran hoping it doesn't bite them too
11. Washington, London, Paris and other symbols of western oppression disappear in a series of blinding lights

Of course this is probably just my paranoia kicking in but I am worried about crackpot loonies like A'hmadinnerjacket getting nukes

5 December 2009 at 10:56  
Blogger Kenpachi said...

Your Grace,

"Shouldn’t we be just a little more concerned that they are on the brink of acquiring a nuclear bomb?".

Many people in the West will no doubt celebrate such an occassion. We are steadily losing our Judeo-Christian identity to political correctness and multiculturalism.

The facts are diluted to such an extent in modern discourse, that it's no longer just our political elites who are unable to see the distinction between right and wrong.

I hope Mr. MatureCheese is right.

5 December 2009 at 11:05  
Anonymous len said...

All streams of Islam believe in a divine saviour, known as the Mahdi, who will appear at the End of Days in the company of Isa (Jesus).
But this Isa is plainly not the Jesus of the Bible.The differences between the Islamic Isa and the Lord Jesus Christ show that behind the Koran is a spirit which denies the identity of the Lord Jesus as revealed in the New Testament. Within the New Testament this spirit is defined for us as the spirit of antichrist. In 1 John 2.19 we read concerning the spirit of antichrist: ‘They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.’ Islam came out of a form of corrupted Christianity but did not continue in the teachings of the Apostles and therefore created an antichristian religion.

5 December 2009 at 11:09  
Blogger The Anti Christ said...

As an example, The Anthropogenic Disregard For Human Eyebrow Growth (ADFHEG) will be giving a sermon on AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) at Westminster today. Does he grasp the potential for sudden temperature increases in the East I wonder? And it will be very anthropogenic as well - No I doubt it.

5 December 2009 at 11:10  
Blogger Gnostic said...

The Isrealis roll their sleeves up when it comes to the crunch and get stuck into the job of defending themselves. Somehow I don't think the weight of global condemnation from an unfriendly, leftist main stream media will outweigh taking direct action against the very real chance of being turned into radioactive ash.

The world leaders, if they don't extrat their heads from their collective arses, will leave the Iraelis with little choice other than a pre-empive attack. It's a metter of survival.

I won't condemn them for taking out the enrichment plants because they will be doing the world a big favour. And you know what? I think the West is hoping that's exactly what is going to happen so they can wipe their filthy leftist hands of the whole affair and STILL stick it to Israel.

5 December 2009 at 11:12  
Anonymous Dobryden said...

I would like to thank Cranmer for today's article.

5 December 2009 at 11:27  
Anonymous Nadia said...


From reading your blog article, it is evident that you are basing your assumption that Iran is producing nuclear weapons on Ahmadinejad's statement, that he is prepared to produce anything Iran needs itself...could this not be to taunt the West? It seems quite a weak premise to base your argument on...

It seems to me that you are stuck in your discourse and cannot appreciate Iran as nation, that perhaps, is not seeking to produce nuclear weapons. ElBaradei himself said in September that there was no credible evidence to prove Iran's production of nuclear weapons.Besides even if it were wouldn't you agree that Iran has every right?

This all seems to me the build up to an attack on Iran. After learning from the mistakes that the Bush admin. made with the tenuous links with Iraq and WMD, the West have learnt that if it needs an invasion which is supported by the public, it needs to create the hype first. So after they have moved out of Iraq, they will simply jump over the fence to Iran - do the same old, steal its oil, destroy the infrastructure with a veneer of democratical ideals which it seeks to impose on Iran. You know if they are lucky, perhaps throw in a new Shah like they did 1953...and then in a few years time, after a dodgy investigation, we will find out Iran never had nukes to start with. Lovely isn't it?

5 December 2009 at 11:35  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nearly two thousand years ago, an elderly Christian leader was banished to an island as a punishment for sharing his faith in Christ. There, as he communed with the Lord on the island, he had a series of visions which described things which would take place in the last days. The man's name was John and the visions he saw were recorded and are now known as the book of Revelation.

Many have tried to defuse the book by turning it into a giant parable in which nothing can be definitely known except that in the end Christ will triumph and all will be well. But such an interpretation makes all the details of the visions meaningless. Some have dared to suggest that John's visions may have been more literal than most have supposed. This more literalistic interpretation just might make sense if John was seeing the terrible results of a nuclear holocaust just before Christ's coming to claim planet earth.

Nearly two thousand years ago, an elderly Christian leader was banished to an island as a punishment for sharing his faith in Christ. There, as he communed with the Lord on the island, he had a series of visions which described things which would take place in the last days. The man's name was John and the visions he saw were recorded and are now known as the book of Revelation.

Many have tried to defuse the book by turning it into a giant parable in which nothing can be definitely known except that in the end Christ will triumph and all will be well. But such an interpretation makes all the details of the visions meaningless. Some have dared to suggest that John's visions may have been more literal than most have supposed. This more literalistic interpretation just might make sense if John was seeing the terrible results of a nuclear holocaust just before Christ's coming to claim planet earth.

In his book There's A New World Coming (1973), Hal Lindsey writes:

"Although it is possible for God to supernaturally pull off every miracle in the Book of Revelation and use totally unheard of means to do it, I personally believe that all the enormous ecological catastrophes described in this chapter (Revelation 8) are the direct result of nuclear weapons. In actuality, man inflicts these judgments on himself. God simply steps back and removes His restraining influence from man, allowing him to do what comes naturally out of his sinful nature. In fact, if the Book of Revelation had never been written, we might well predict these very catastrophes within fifty years or less!"

5 December 2009 at 11:53  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I expect the cognoscenti of the West to praise Iran for switching from fossil fuels to ensure a Jud- woops, carbon-free future.

5 December 2009 at 12:09  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Your Grace,

Nadia said:

'Besides even if it were wouldn't you agree that Iran has every right?'

No! Not every right.

5 December 2009 at 12:35  
Anonymous Brian E. said...

After all the lies we were told about Iraq and the, to many of us, dubious reasons for going into Afghanistan, who is going to believe any UK or US government that says Iran is a danger? They've shouted"wolf" once too often!
Personally, I don't thinh Israel will resort to Nukes or bombing in the immediate future; I think action by Mossad such as assination is far more likely.

5 December 2009 at 12:39  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your Grace - we need their oil before Red China gets it.

The quickerwe go to war against them the better.

It is no use talking about the morality of it all. The real world demands oil.

The expected demand increase in 2010 will be the first year to show average growth since 2007, before record prices and the economic crisis slashed consumption.

Global oil demand has fallen by almost 2 percent since 2007, when average annual consumption hit an all-time high around 86.2 million barrels daily.

The steep drop in demand saw oil prices crash from record highs of almost $150 a barrel in July 2008 to below $33 a barrel in December last year.

Since then prices have more than doubled to just below $80 a barrel as OPEC -- whose member countries pump more than one in every three barrels of oil -- tried to cut output quotas by 4.2 million barrels, or 5 percent of world demand.

Demand growth is expected to be strongest in countries outside the OECD, with China leading the way.

"We see a healthy demand recovery of 1.5 million barrels next year, there's only so much you can contract," said Sarah Emerson, director of Energy Security Analysis Inc. in Boston.

"Demand growth in China next year should be significant and the U.S. will go from two years of contraction to growth."

The Chinese economy is expected to grow by around 8 percent in 2009 and may post even stronger growth next year. Implied Chinese oil demand in October was up more than 10 percent year-on-year, customs data showed on Monday.

5 December 2009 at 12:49  
Anonymous Hank Petram said...

Your Grace,

I heartily endorse every word of Gnostic's (today at 11:12). I do, however, have a sad postscript to add: destroying Iran's nuclear weapons plants won't put an end to the menace for good. In a few years they'd be able to get back to the stage they're at now.

5 December 2009 at 12:52  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

God's peace plan

The Bible foretold in Isaiah 11:11, Ezekiel 37:12, Deuteronomy 30:3-5 and elsewhere of a time when the Jews would be brought back into the Promised Land from the nations of the world. This regathering began 61 years ago on May 14, 1948, and is ongoing today. Possessing omniscient foresight, God foreknew that an Arab-Israeli conflict would erupt as a result.

Jeremiah 12:14-17 tells us that as the time drew near for the return of the Jews into Israel the landscape of the Middle East would undergo a geopolitical facelift as God intended to restore Arabs, Persians and Jews back into the historical homes of their ancestral heritages. After the fall of the Ottoman Empire in 1917, we see this turn of geopolitical events take place as one by one the Arab, Persian and Jewish states emerged.

Afghanistan 1919
Egypt 1922
Saudi Arabia & Iraq 1932
Iran 1935
Lebanon 1943
Syria & Jordan 1946
Israel 1948

Jeremiah's passages make it clear that God would import the Jews into Israel and export the Arabs and Persians out of Israel when the time came for the implementation of God's one-state solution. Jeremiah 12:14 refers to the Arab and Persian populations as "My evil neighbors who touch the inheritance which I have caused My people Israel to inherit," alluding to the Promised Land given to the Jewish Patriarch Abraham in Genesis 15:18. As stated prior, God intended to have compassion on those populations that would operate in compliance with His divine plan.

Many predominately Islamic populations will fail to comply. These nations and/or terrorist entities are described in Psalm 83 and Ezekiel 38 and include but are not limited to: Palestinians, Syrians, Hezbollah, Hamas, Iranians, Lebanese, Jordanians, Saudis, Egyptians, Libyans and Turks.

5 December 2009 at 13:17  
Blogger ultramontane grumpy old catholic said...

A friend of mine who had worked in Israel told me that if the crunch came and Israel found herself under threat, there would be no second diaspora ("we're not going through that again"). They would take the rest of the world with them.

To paraphrase Tom Lehrer (slightly)

Oh we’ll all grill together when we grill
Mr Antichrist will get a massive thrill
When the Imam called al-Mahdi, convenes a nuclear party
No-one will have the time to make a will.

5 December 2009 at 13:26  
Blogger The Anti Christ said...


Stop it you big tease.

5 December 2009 at 13:32  
Blogger The Anti Christ said...

We are all gagging for it - we have been for a while. One of the biggest manufacturing industries in the UK at the close of the 20th century is the Arms Industry.

An intersting video:

John Pilger - Flying the Flag (Arming the World)
50:35 - 2 years ago

John Pilger and David Munro look behind the political rhetoric and discover the world of international arms dealing. Won a Bronze Apple in the category of 'Domestic and International Concerns', National Educational Film & Video Festival, Oakland, California, 1995; Certificate of Honourable Mention in the 'International Relations' category, The Chris Awards (Columbus International Film Festival), Worthington, Ohio, 1995.

5 December 2009 at 13:36  
Blogger Kenpachi said...

To Nadia,

Do the numerous genocidal statements made by the Iranian regime mean nothing in this context?

What about the regular "Death to America/Israel" marches across the country?

How about it's open support for Hamas and Hizbollah? It's constant weapon smuggling and aggressive posturing?


Ah that's right, it's all a Jewish conspiracy afterall. Damn thos pesky Elders of Zion, when will they learn eh?

5 December 2009 at 14:15  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Your Grace,

Nadia’s comment is interesting. She states: ‘Besides even if it were [arming by nuclear weapons] wouldn't you agree that Iran has every right?’

What she is doing is relying on Western precepts of fairness: if X has a gun to protect himself with then so should Y.

What she excludes from the totality of the discussion is the characters of X and Y and their roles.

X may well be the sheriff and Y the outlaw or the suspect for a crime, for example.

5 December 2009 at 14:15  
Anonymous Bag Lady said...

D.Singh, have you and his Grace made up? I thought you had challenged him to a duel?

5 December 2009 at 14:18  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Your Grace,

I withdraw yesterday's invitation.

5 December 2009 at 14:22  
Blogger Owl said...

I am having trouble understanding your post. If Iran is not in the process of producing nuclear weapons then why is it going out of it's way to convince the world that it is? Why do they need the high-grade urarium when the low-grade is quite adaquate for industrial needs?
We are seeing the leader of a theocracy (the people have no say whatsover on pain of *** and no comebacks as it is the will of Allah) confronting the western world for no sensible reason. That is, sense in our meanning of the word. As His Grace has pointed out quite distinctly, this may make eminent sense to a religious fanatic. Religious fanatics do not have to concern themselves with the welfare of mere mortals, they are above that. They are not even concerned with the welfare of their own people who are at most mere pawns to be (mis)used as required. I do not think the end of the world is at hand and the mention of Hal Lindsay caused me to chuckle (when will he get anything right) but Mr. Dinner Jacket, by aiming for the end of Israel, is risking the end of Iran.
But I don't think that concerns him at all.

5 December 2009 at 15:17  
Anonymous Stuart said...

mmm, it wasn't that long ago that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei threatened to "blow up the heart of Israel", presumably this will also be by the "grace of god"?

5 December 2009 at 15:19  
Blogger Roger Pearse said...

That nice Ayatollah Hitler would never invade Czechoslovakia. You're being alarmist.

There are only two points at which we can have a war with an aggressive regime determined to attack us; before they are ready, or after.

5 December 2009 at 15:48  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think the situation between Iran & others was partly mishandled by the West(I won't comment on others). I think that Iran was not always negotiated with in a fair & respectful way by some, & the "my way or the highway because we are bigger or more powerful than you" style of interaction by some made the situation worse, especially given Iranian history & culture. Now Iran & Israel (alphabetical order - I am trying not to be disrespectful to anyone) have a graver dispute with potentially dangerous outcomes. Iran has also no doubt also made mistakes in the situation. As a Christian I regret anything wrong by others in this situation which has been done "in the name of Jesus" . I am trying to be tactful - if I offend anyone unfairly, it is not on purpose.

I think that as Christians we need (like all involved in this or any dispute) to be as fair as possible to all sides. If friends are over-reacting in a dangerous situation, we act in good faith when we urge them (or sometimes intervene) to calm down & not go ahead with anything which is wreckless(when feeling anger or fear we can all individualy or as nations act unwisely) or which will increase a dispute or not a good solution, though we try not to intervene too much or too little & make mistakes there too. When we approve of anything which those governing Iran or Israel or Palestinian areas(alphabetical order) or anywhere else do which is seriously wrong & harms people(all governments & nations like all people do wrong sometimes), it harms our friends, because sins harm the wrongdoer(s) as well as the victim(s). Governments' wrongs harm their people too.
As a Christian I wish all people & countries well. I honour Israel & its security but also other nations and peoples. Some other genuine Christians may raise grievances of Israel or Iran or the Palestinians (alphabetical order) or other nations or topics.

I am not a diplomat, scientist or security expert. I hope the experts will handle this situation carefully (as some do and have). My main comment is that I think the situation was handled badly for a while by some,including by some who oversimplified the situation & didn't always deal respectfully with Iran as a country with a culture, history & needs as a nation. Some no doubt made similar mistakes towards other countries in the Middle East which are affected by this dispute, including to Israel.

I am purposely not saying more because I am not an expert & the situation is complex, delicate & grave. I hope that those who are angry calm down & that grievances are addressed & solutions are found which benefit everyone involved & are as just, merciful & wise as possible. I hope many Christians will pray for all involved in the dispute - those in political, religious, diplomatic, technical & other professions. The prior over-simplification by some to religious issues(though religion contributes, not just in one country) or complete demonisation of Iran by some or Israel(alphabetical order) by others didn't help. I hope that a good solution is found & that the situation will not escalate everyone's harm. Where there are extremists involved in any aspect of this situation, it also escalates.
The situation is a sensitive one for many, particularly as it involves the Middle East & I hope noone will overreact to any comments by myself or anyone in regard to the dispute, especially if hurts or angers by them. We are all biased and imperfect, especially in delicate & complex issues.

5 December 2009 at 16:05  
Anonymous Bag Lady said...

Nadia at 11.53 said :

" there was no credible evidence to prove Iran's production of nuclear weapons.Besides even if it were wouldn't you agree that Iran has every right? "

NO the Iran terror state has no right to build nuclear weapons. The first things these lunatics would do is to send the nukes straight into Jerusalem and then nuke anyone else they fancied. They must be stopped, BEFORE, they get a chance to do so.

But will Obama have the balls to back up Israel? I doubt it.........

5 December 2009 at 16:42  
Anonymous Religion of Peace said...

What's poor little Iran ever done to any of the posters on this blog? Isn't it her right to have nuclear weapons- Israel does, but I can't see anyone arguing against that? In anycase there would be too much protests if they attacked another poor, defenceless muslim country again.

5 December 2009 at 17:43  
Anonymous non mouse said...

"[...] wouldn't you agree that Iran has every right? "

A year or two back, I think re N. Korea, an American taxi driver said to me, "Anyway, who are we to be telling people whether or not they should have nuclear weapons?"

I told him we were the ones who developed them, and the only ones who ever used them. So not only do we hold the secrets of manufacture (and more nukes than anybody), we also understand the consequences of using them. And we are the ones who are trying to be responsible about those consequences.

Not long after I met a young student who hailed from Hiroshima.
She seemed OK, and everything; but I felt most terribly guilty - even though I hadn't done anything to her people and understand the logic of the attacks. One could argue that those bombs are the reason why euroland hasn't had any more big wars since.

Now Dinner Jacket might be bluffing - and his nuclear physicists might be as accomplished as his English - but he's playing with .... well, AntiChrist gets the picture!! So maybe we went into Iraq and Afghanistan at least partly to deter and monitor Iran.

5 December 2009 at 18:00  
Anonymous Realist said...

Iran is China's largest oil supplier. Any attack on that country will effectively start WW3. Given that the US is having a hard time defeating several thousand Islamic marlboro men, I doubt they would welcome such a situation.

As for Israel, they're realists. They my sulk that they no longer have a free hand in ME meddling but they know Iran would never attack them. What would be the point?

5 December 2009 at 18:19  
Blogger Nadia said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

5 December 2009 at 18:22  
Blogger D. Singh said...


I maintain that 'equality' is not an absolute.

Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. It is surrounded by 350 million hostiles.

Israel is not the aggresor State. he longs to live in peace with his neighbours.

Perhaps Iran could accept the Palestinian people.

5 December 2009 at 18:38  
Blogger Nadia Marques de Carvalho said...

D Singh,

You are analysing this predicament through a relativist perspective (which I can appreciate). So does that mean, you do not maintain that equality is an absolute?

I do not see any of you arguing Israel's 150 nuclear weapons which are AIMED at Iran? Doesn't Iran have the right to protect herself? Even if she is as "terrorist - state" (which the West has caricatured her out to be)?


America provides MILLIONS of dollars in aid to Israel - who is now the aggressor. Iran has EVERY right to provide to Hizbollah and Hamas, even if they are, what you perceive to be - terrorist groups. Besides I don't see you complaining about the war planes and weapons the US sends over to Israel - openly. Also, what anti-America, anti-Israel marches across Iran. Kenpachi I suggest you GO to Iran and see for yourself that people have nothing against the Americans since Obama came to power, (perhaps the Israelis because of history). As for the Americans, their music is everywhere and so is their clothing and food products. Please, do not confuse Iran for any other Middle Eastern country that is against America. Kenpachi you also said

"Do the numerous genocidal statements made by the Iranian regime mean nothing in this context?"

Ok, and what about the Israeli threat Netanyahu recently said; having all options on the table, hint hint nuke Iran?

No? Well I guessed you wouldn't have dared consult the opposing side of the argument...

Bag Lady -

Well, I guess your Machiavellian nature as prevented you from appreciating that every individual/country has this right - especially when their opponents (Israel) have nukes. Also, don't mock the Iranians by actually suggesting that they are stupid enough to nuke Jerusalem and start WW3.

However, to conclude I agree with the anonymous comment that it is a complex situation, whereby history must be consulted to resolve this delicate situation. People should be more open minded and not believe straight away that Iran is a terrorist nation - simply going along with their Government.


5 December 2009 at 18:38  
Blogger Nadia Marques de Carvalho said...

Israel isn't the aggressor state? Ahh so the recent War on Gaza mean nothing to you? What about the two intifadas or perhaps 1973, '67, '56, or '48? Nothing?

Longs to live in peace? Are you having a chuckle? If she "longed to live in peace", then wouldn't she be seated at the table of negotiation? Wouldn't she have stopped the building of illegal settlments in the West Bank? Wouldn't she allow for an appropriate amount of food and medicine and WATER to enter Gaza? If Israel wasn't the oppressor, why are their people in gaza who are NOT allowed out of Gaza? Why is their an "iron wall" dividing a thriving nation, and a state imprisoned by Israeli law?

I am not even going to attempt to negate your statement that "Israel is not a democracy", to be honest I am just glad you aren't the leader of any country...equality is not absolute? So you feel you can just strip that equality do you?


5 December 2009 at 18:44  
Anonymous non mouse said...

Realist - I'm not convinced that the Americans are trying their absolute hardest to defeat the M-men!! If they had a solid reason to go all out, maybe even some of their non-nationalist elements - you know, hispanic immigrants, marxist theorists, etc - might find it worthwhile to defend the biggest gravy-train in the World.

As for what we used to call the "Yellow Peril" - once they decide they want WWIII they'll have it, Iran not-without-sitting-down. Meanwhile, I just wish China would turn out some quality goods instead of mountains of cheap and useless trash that we have to buy and re-buy - in the hope of finding something that works.

5 December 2009 at 18:48  
Blogger D. Singh said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

5 December 2009 at 18:51  
Blogger D. Singh said...


Iran does not even need nuclear power. It has vast reserves of oil and gas.

So why would it want to acquire nuclear weapons?

It has not even been proven that Israel has nuclear weapons.

Thus Iranian foreign policy towards Israel is based upon fear which explains the President of Iran's hatred.

He is, therefore, an irrational man.

5 December 2009 at 18:59  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

D. Singh - it is well known that Israel has nuclear weapons. Heard of Dimona? Mordechai Vanunu? Israel has more nuclear scientists per capita than anywhere else on earth.

5 December 2009 at 19:17  
Blogger Nadia Marques de Carvalho said...

D Singh,

I guessed you weren't going to answer my questions.

"It has not even been proven that Israel has nuclear weapons." Well, it has not even been proven that Iran has/is going to have nuclear weapons. We were open about all uranium enriching sites.

Israel is not.

However, I would agree that Iranian foreign policy is based upon fear. You argued that Israel is engulfed by 350 million hostilities, but you have failed to appreciate who these hostilities are. These hostilities are uneducated people, most probably living under the poverty line; most of them are not a threat. On the contrary, Iran is threatened by the USA, UK and Israel (Russia and China are on the verge of going against Iran as well). Thus Iran is afraid because of Western action. Accepting this premise of why Iran is afraid, it becomes a given that it is the West who are to blame.

5 December 2009 at 19:26  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It aint just the crazy aspects of islam that some are trying to make into reality.

37 or 38 your grace?

5 December 2009 at 19:30  
Anonymous Pre-emptive strike said...

So shouldn't we have a pre-emptive strike and nuke Iran, before Iran nukes the UK, USA, Israel?

5 December 2009 at 20:37  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good- we have finally found a counter balance to D.Singh. This Nadia lady is equally as nutty as Singh is- this is a debate I am itching to watch.

5 December 2009 at 20:40  
Anonymous Bag Lady said...

Nadia - Iran said she wants to blow Israel off the map, thus this state talks of genocide. They also deny the holocaust happened. Is this a regime that should have nukes? No. And you are mad to think otherwise.

5 December 2009 at 20:41  
Anonymous King gob said...

Nadia, in 1973 and 1948 the arab states actually attacked Israel.

5 December 2009 at 20:44  
Anonymous Tarquin Ready said...

Nadia ,You talk about Arab states being under the poverty line, but Iran is a major oil and gas producer, so it would have earned a few billion out of that for a few years. I wonder why the Iranian people are poor, then? Nothing to do with their corrupt terror state government, perchance?

5 December 2009 at 20:50  
Blogger Nadia Marques de Carvalho said...

King Gob,

Arguably, Israel caused both the 1948 and 1973, despite not attacking first. Yes we have to consider the Balfour Declarartion and British intervention, however it was the Israelis who began to gain momentum with the creation of the Hagannah, causing the Arab Revolt of 1939 by oppressing the arabs and then to add to it were "given" more fertile land than the Arabs, despite there being more Arabs.

Ahmadinejad said five years ago that Israel should be wiped off the map. Ok, that is wrong. However, one must acknowledge the the Iran-Israel Cold War, I doubt there will be total war and because of history both countries will pass threatening comments. Instead of clinging to comments Ahmadinejad said over 5 years ago, why aren't people more clinging to the threats Netanyahu is throwing to Iran? This year?

Tarquin Ready - you seem so ready to criticise the Iranian Government for being a corrupt terror state (I assume you were given this view by the British Government - although I am not a great advocate of the present Iranian Gov.), and yet you fail to consider the American or Israeli Government. Don't you ever stop and think about the information you are being provided with? If anything you are given your opinion, so you must think that because Western Governments aren't "corrupt" they have the right to the nuclear weapon? Also, I would argue Iran is quite poor because of the sanctions it has had imposed on it for over the past decade...would have thought that was a given...

6 December 2009 at 00:08  
Blogger Owl said...

You are still totally (wilfully) missing the point. Your leader is a fanatic and is not trusted. He condemns himself with his own words. The open questions of the last elections are very present and the disappearing oposition politicians don't help his position much.
Democracy has counters and balances even when we are seeing them stretched to breaking point by our own goverment. Democracy in a theocracy is a farce as we have seen.
I think it is understandable that people get nervous when nuclear weapons are in the hands of a madman, and a religious fanatic can hardly be labelled normal.
Funnily I don't remember Israel stating that they want to push anyone into the sea but some Arab states have uttered this sentiment.
The Abrab states have failed to do this so it looks like a new, long distance, method is required.

6 December 2009 at 00:26  
Anonymous len said...

The fanatical cry of the Islamic Jihadists today is, “Ala hu Akbar,” which is not a reference to the greatness of god, but is a direct challenge to the God of Scripture, claiming that the god of Islam (Ilyah or Allah) is greater than Jehovah. The Jihadists believe that by annihilating the descendants of Jacob, (and Christians) that they are hastening the day of the Allah, and the return of the Mahdi.

6 December 2009 at 00:30  
Anonymous len said...

While the Bible confirms the blessing of Abraham through his son Isaac, and Jacob, the Bible also offers a promise to the descendents of Ishmael. Jehovah has promised to bless Ishmael’s descendants and make them a great nation too. Ironically, true to the nature of Allah, the Koran offers no such promises to the descendants of Isaac and Jacob. To the contrary, Allah requires that the seed of Abraham descended from Isaac and Jacob be killed.

6 December 2009 at 00:34  
Blogger Frugal Dougal said...

We could kill two birds with one stone by getting all Western troops out of Afghanistan and nuking either Pakistan's north-west frontier district or even targeting their nukes - which will soon be Al Qaeda's nukes - directly.

6 December 2009 at 02:09  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Reminds me of a sweatshirt that was popular amongst the soldiery a few years back but would now be seen as politically incorrect. 'Kill 'em all - let their Gods sort them out'. Crass but hey, when did soldiers worry about offending the politically correct?

Israel wont stand fr it. They will launch a pre-emptive strike and as I did in the last fracas they got involved in against Iran, I'll be hoping their superb skills in combat ensure that it is one strike and over and out.

Iran cannot be allowed to have weapons like this. Israel does stand to be targetted by Iran - that's no secret - and that cannot be alllowed to happen. Where would it end? Do people think Ahmaddinnerjacket would stop once he'd levelled Israel?

Think again. It would unite the militant Muslims throughout the world.

Well written piece, your Grace.


6 December 2009 at 02:09  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm no Bible basher but the End Days scenario seems to be shaping up nicely.

At present we are not dealing with militant Islam at all well - Muslims are spreading across Western countries like a nasty rash.

A nuclear exchange will set the Muslim world alight - they will go crazy if Israel retaliates against Iran. I wouldn't be surprised if Pakistan and India launched missiles at each other in the ensuing confusion.

I have often wondered if the reason for having troops in Iraq and Afghanistan is as much about being ready and in place for the final showdown as in "nation building".

We will have to side with Israel and deal with Muslims in the West very harshly as they begin to create massive unrest. Our politicians will not be able to play their usual game of appeasement.

The final showdown between civilisation and Islam will have begun.

I'm looking forward to it.

6 December 2009 at 06:55  
Anonymous ever anon said...

Meantime ... someone's put a stop to that amusing game: whack the minaret!!!

6 December 2009 at 08:57  
Blogger ENGLISHMAN said...

So it looks like a brilliant idea,to have trained thirty or so iranian physists at Oxford for irans "peacefull" use of nuclear energy,but whatever happens,we will have no more input to these deliberations than we did to the enslavement of our country by the euro-fascist,or the climate bullshit,they just went ahead and did what they wanted anyway with no real opposition from any-one,since the "politicians"now realise that they can safely ignore the wishes of the people,because they would rather type than fight.

6 December 2009 at 09:47  
Blogger Kenpachi said...


"America provides MILLIONS of dollars in aid to Israel - who is now the aggressor."

Israel is a tiny nation of less than 8 million which has been threatened with destruction by all of its neighbours since the state came into being. How is Israel the aggressor?

"Iran has EVERY right to provide to Hizbollah and Hamas, even if they are, what you perceive to be - terrorist groups."

What do you perceive them to be Nadia? If Iran has EVERY right to support these groups, then Israel has EVERY right to fight them.

"Also, what anti-America, anti-Israel marches across Iran."

6 December 2009 at 10:01  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

can't we just nuke 'em?

6 December 2009 at 22:39  
Blogger Kenpachi said...


I really hope you're still lurking around, you just have to read this one for a chuckle:,2933,579640,00.html?test=latestnews

8 December 2009 at 01:06  
Blogger Nadia Marques de Carvalho said...


Elaborate please.

1) Have you noted to source? Fox News. Could it have been anymore subjective?

2) How do you know the translation is correct? As you know words have baggage, so how can you know that these words in Farsi had different connotations?

3) Even if he is claiming that the Americans are blocking the return of the Mahdi shouldn't be respect this? If you are trying to point out that his statement is irrational; I am sure you are old and humble enough to note that the East and West have different perceptions of rationality.

To be honest, I do not think that helped your argument.

Besides we were not arguing over the mental stability of the Iranian President - I don't support him myself. What I do disagree on however, is your opinion that Israel is not the aggressor. Although I maintain that Hamas is also an aggressor, this does not go to say that Israel is not one either. If anything both Governments are the aggressors and the people are the victims. Yes I agree that the State of Israel has always been threatened by surrounding Arab nations - but, to generalise, we all know that the Arabs are incapable of nothing. However, I am sure we both have different definitions of the word "aggressor", even if your definition means that despite the drone attacks on innocent children, and not allowing people to cross for hospital treatment is not a trait of an aggressor - then I fear for the english language.

10 December 2009 at 14:21  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older