Who ya calling Hitler?
Thursday, September 27, 2007 at 3:01PM ARTICLE: "Ahmadinejad urged to take more care in what he says," by Barbara Slavin, USA Today, 27 September 2007, p. 7A.
I know, the guy's completely insane because he believes his messiah could return any day, smite all his enemies and elevate the faithful to eternal good life and happiness.
Not that there's anything wrong with that!
(Just in case my Mom's reading, I don't want to come off sounding un-Christian--regarding my own personal "irrational" belief system, that is.)
Here's the beef:
Told that many Americans liken him to Hitler, Ahmadinejad said he viewed "Hitler's role as extremely negative. The war he planned claimed over 60 million lives and Hitler's image to us is despicable. I don't look like him, and my culture has nothing to do with him.
Culture? No. But regime? More of an argument there, although the Mussolini comparison is far more apt.
But I digress, please continue reading:
Jon Alterman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank, made the Hitler remark and said he was a bit surprised by the response.
"He showed a depth of thinking about World War II that he hasn't before," Alterman said. "The conventional thinking is that he's on another planet on these issues.".
Ouch! Who shot themselves in the foot there? The nutcase dictator or the "conventionally thinking" think tanker?
Hell, maybe Ahmadinejad just caught an episode of Burns' documentary the night before on PBS..
As for the Holocaust, Ahmadinejad called it a "reality of our time, a history that occurred."
No worries. When he wants to get us all lathered up again, expect Andrewdiceclayminejad to strike again!
Gary Sick, a nuke proliferation expert (vice Iranian or political leadership expert or psychologist, but bear with me here) says Ahmadinejad clearly digs attention ("He basks in it.").
You think?
But Sick fears none of this pushback will dissuade Ahmadinejad to abandon confrontation with America:
"I think he's a very shallow man with little introspection," Sick said. "While he got an earful, it just rolls right off him."
Bit of a hard-believing evangelical endtimer who's shallow, doesn't question himself or his actions, and ignores criticism.
In bipolar standoffs, I'd say Bush and Ahmadinejad are a match made in heaven--or hell.
I can go either way on this one.
But don't tell my Mom!
Reader Comments (13)
I'm sayin' that letting Ahmadini'manutjob speak at Columbia and entertain journalists in New York is akin to letting Hitler speak in London wile his army was killing Brits at Dunkirk.
Is this the theatre of the absurd or what?
So you think we can cut a deal with Ahmadinejad and he's not really denying the Holocaust?? Or did I misread you? I mean, what should America do???
I must add as one who is a friend of Jews, an at-times colleague of Jews and a relative of Jews: This is the same, well, director of a Holocaust denial conference who hosted David Duke and a World Without Zionism conference. Obviously, conferences speak louder than a mere conversation.
On the flip side, I honestly think you are a bit off on Iran (but bang-on about the need for a Leviathan & SysAdmin plus the concept of a Gap). I also think the Ahmadinejad propaganda tour worked wonders and I believe I greatly erred in calling for a debate with Ahmadinejad last Saturday based on the reports I have read regarding the censorship in Iran of the true nature of the Columbia excursion from Pajamas Media and an Iranian dissident.
I sincerely look forward to your thoughts.
Yet he's called a Dictator from seemingly intelligent people .Iran is a flawed state but is a naturally a more open and secular nation than some of the US's crazy sunni Gulf state allies ( who fund and manpower A'Qaida).Iran has a Jewsih community and MP , so how can they be rabid 'wipe them off the earthers' .Shrill hysteria and complete lack of objectivity.A country where a million people marched in sympathy over 911 ..sincere and heartfelt....yet bombing them , containing them , cursing them with schoolyard gibes ? Whats all this about?The US lives in a comfortable bubble of self delusion.Keep repeating nonsense but it still remains nonsense.The US has shown itself to be a foolish adversary for the Iranians and a foolish friend to it's allies.What was that line in the ART OF WAR? Better a wise enemy than a foolish friend ?...The Iranians will have to expect foolishness at all times.Limited strikes are all that the US is capable of ...the Iranians know this.They can grin and bear that kind of 'punishment ' .It may not keep A in power but the Islamic republic and Shia power is not going to disappear into history with tactical munition strikes ...not matter how great the rhetoric and images look on FOX news.As for the Holocaust denial..it's just the same kind of historical distortion that every country does when history does'nt suit present day realities.When, in the 1940's , terrified Palestinians fled their homes in the middle of the night in fear for their lives ...into refugee camps....this isdenied and distorted into.....they left because an Imam ( a closet Nazi on the verge of creating a concentration camp for Jews in Palestine is a great extra detail to add spice to the denial) told them to leave...so that the way could be left clear for a shock and awe campaign by the great Arabian camel army .So hence..they left , not out of fear ( which would make them victims) but out of coldbloodedcaculations for mass jew murdering intentions ( they deserved what they got).This distortion is common currency in the West.(Yes...we really are as deluded and stupid as 'they ' are)Somebody with a fixation over the Holocaust denial like to comment on this?.
I cannot believe SVC's post -- Mao's regime slaughtered people by the tens of millions -- probably killing more than the entire present-day population of Iran. Maybe you don't believe that Nixon's trip there was the best thing to happen to the world since the end of WWII, but you have to be at least neutral on it. But here David Duke's name being played like some kind of trump card. David Duke and Ahmadinejad are that much more horrifying than 50-75 million dead in a nation run like a madhouse? Doing business with a Holocaust denier is worse than doing business with a Holocaust causer?
In the early part of the decade, the Iranians convinced me they were ready to deal and delivered to my satisfaction in Afghanistan. But then suddenly that Mao thing never happened, and a nation of prissy Victorian schoolmarms daren't sully itself with such company. Far better to lift our chin, plug our nose and threaten them into arming our enemies. A few hundred billion dollars, a few thousand dead...at least we didn't deal with any friends of David Duke.
Your clean hands carry a heavy price, I'm afraid.
I highly recommend you educate yourself on Christian eschatology (if you c/dare, read about Preterism). What you will find is that some serious (and heck, even orthodox, evangelical) current Christian theologians (and some of most significant church patriarchs) don't espouse the sort of "Left Behind" hype that you seem to think is common-place. It may be in some American quarters. But even then, I don't see how A'jad's yearning for a bloodbath that is the precursor to the return of the Mahdi is the same thing as the Christ's return resulting in a large battle. The key difference being, A'jad thinks he can hasten the return of Christ. Bush, even if he holds a Futurist eschatology, does hold any pretentions that he can hasten the return of Christ with a calamitous war. Care with causality please!
I just received The Pentagon's New Map. Look forward to reading it! Heard you via podcast on Hugh Hewitt's talk show months ago (in Australia!). Loved your arguments. Highly regard your analysis, but you have failed to convince me vis-a-vis Iran yet. And loved the fact that you loved our great land Down-Under!
1) You are comparing Mao to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the latter of which is giving arms, aid and bodies to the Iraqi insurgency plus carrying out terrorist operations against Israel, when he's not shaking hands with David Duke.
2) You say, "In the early part of the decade, the Iranians convinced me they were ready to deal and delivered to my satisfaction in Afghanistan." This sounds like either you've had dealings with the Iranians or you're just a citizen pundit who was convinced Iran was ready to deal. Please explain.
I do think the Mao trip was a good thing and has begun the process of democratization - first economic and eventually political - of China and prevented another great power war. See, we saw the split between the PRC and the USSR... and took advantage of it.
Ahmadinejad is a fascinating character. Imagine that Jerry Fallwell was the Grand Pastor and a council of his ilk ran a US theocracy. Now imagine the puppet president they would into place and the kinds of statements that president might make. Pretty scary -- as is Ahmadinejad.
"akin to letting Hitler speak in London wile his army was killing Brits at Dunkirk." -- Wouldn't that be Churchill in Berlin because we are the ones the invaded the countries on either side of Iran...
Similarly, I think Hitler/Nazi comments show a lack of understanding of Ahmadinejad. While I don't condone his comments and it is quite possible that he is prejudiced against Jews, it misses the point that he is a politician first-and-foremost. He makes these glancingly-scandalous comments to grate on his enemies abroad and whip up bigoted passions at home. That kind of politician is not unique to Iran.
We have allowed Ahmadinejad to make the current political struggle symmetrical. We have forgotten that freedom, the rule of law, the scientific method, democracy, etc. etc. are all Insurgencies. We should be forcing the Iranians and Saudis to attempt COIN against them.
Show me where I declare the Left Behinders to be the dominant form of evangelicals? You're projecting.
I'm just very comfortable in my faith and so I'm comfortable comparing it to others. That will always mark me as woefully "misinformed" to those who know the "truth" so much better than I. I get this all the time from the net-centric and 4GW crowds. Being non-denominational is very threatening to some audiences, very comforting to others.
As a Catholic, I am constantly encouraged to actually figure out what being a Christian is all about. I find this humorous, of course, since I've actually spent years in a religious school, not just getting bits on the weekend, but there you have it. I know Catholics are supposed to be ignorant of the Bible, but having read it cover to cover many times in a lifestyle where that was considered de rigeur, I guess I find that charge rather weak.
People make religious or historical analogies for one of two reasons: they want to shut down the options or they want to open them up. I tend toward the latter, and that naturally makes me suspect to those who prefer the former.
Here is Iran in 2001 - Sound ready to deal? Sure, he equivocates a little, but less than, say, France. During the war, we didn't hear much but Iran's lack of protest over a predator crashing in its terretory spoke volumes to me. And after the war, they were openly supportive and constructive in setting up the Kharzai regime.
They got pretty miffed when their reward for this outreach was being named to the axis of evil, but their glee over US intentions towards Saddam kept things generally positive. They were helpful in that war, too. Tenet, in his book, tells a great story about how none of Iraq's neighbors would allow a planned shipment of arms to the Kurds to cross through their territory. The Kurdish leader was expressing his contempt for his CIA contact's inability to get the weapons in when a Revolutinary Guard convoy rolls into their Kurdish town with the promised weapons. Sound like Iran was willing to deal?
But then the Iraq war ended and they wanted the same deal they'd gotten in Afghanistan & Bush shut them out. Yet when things started to go bad in 2004, did Iran see it was time to pounce on the Great Satan? Hardly. Here is you see the diplomatic equivalent of Iran in lipstick and stiletto heels, saying hello sailor, lookin for a regional hegemon? When even this failed, they elected Mirror Bush and went with the more reliable strategy of proxy warfare.
So when you expect me to be outraged that they're arming the Iraqi insurgency (you forgot to add Afghani, which is now almost certainly true as well), forgive me if I pass. Bush spent years of hard anti-diplomacy pushing our arch-nemesis into going hot with its defensive perimeter -- would you suggest they simply sit back and wait to get crossed off the list? At least one party here is behaving like a rational maximizer. I don't *like* what Iran is doing now, but when we could have avoided this situation years ago for no cost and much gain, I know who to blame.
Apologies for the projection. You are indeed correct. I cannot point to where you suggest Left behinders are dominant form of evangelicals. Mea culpa.
Regarding Non-denominationalism: that is something that i am quite familiar with. I was baptised into an orthodox church, have attended baptist, independent baptist and anglican churches and pretend to be none of these. I am a christian plain and simply and pick and choose what i consider to be the better aspects of each of these.
For the sake of clarity, I was not aware of your religious beliefs.
You describe comparison as having two purposes: to shut down options or to open them up. The irony of this, is that you have chosen the latter, and still succeeded in shutting down the options by consistently associating the consequence of Bush's eschatology to A'jad's eschatology. I haven't been keeping written notes, but been taking mental notes, so correct me if i'm wrong.
That was the point of my last comment. A comparison of Bush and A'jad's eschatology may show, amongst other things, that:1) Both believe that a Messiah will return;2) Both believe that tumult will precede this event; BUT3) Bush, unlike A'jad, does not believe he can hasten the return of the Promised One by instigating chaos around the world. And this is the salient point because it is most practical one.
Am I missing some bit of nuance in your thinking on this?
The irony is, of course, that Bush has instigated far more chaos around the world than Ahmadinejad could ever dream of.
There is faith, I guess, and there is action.
I like to judge based on what they do, not what they say.