The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Has diplomacy reached the end in the Middle East? > Comments

Has diplomacy reached the end in the Middle East? : Comments

By Bashdar Ismaeel, published 27/5/2009

Is the Iranian nuclear capability the practice of a natural right or an evident danger to world peace?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. All
Ahmadinejad’s Apocalyptic Faith, by Patrick Poole:

"... the one question that ties all of these together in Ahmadinejad's mind is his religious faith. It is the prism through which he views all of these other policy issues, which is why it is of singular importance to understand the ideology that drives this man...

Ahmadinejad’s worldview is shaped by the radical Hojjatieh Shiism...

Most Shiites await the return of the 12th Shiite Imam, Muhammad ibn Hasan, the last direct male descendent of the Prophet Mohammed’s son-in-law Ali, who disappeared in 874AD and is believed to be in an invisible, deathless state of existene, or "occultation", awaiting his return...

But rooted in the Shiite ideology of martyrdom and violence, the Hojjatieh sect adds messianic and apocalyptic elements to an already volatile theology. They believe that chaos and bloodshed must precede the return of the 12th Imam, called the Mahdi. But unlike the biblical apocalypse, where the return of Jesus is preceded by waves of divinely decreed natural disasters, the summoning of the Mahdi through chaos and violence is wholly in the realm of human action. The Hojjatieh faith puts inordinate stress on the human ability to direct divinely appointed events. By creating the apocalyptic chaos, the Hojjatiehs believe it is entirely in the power of believers to affect the Mahdi’s reappearance, the institution of Islamic government worldwide, and the destruction of all competing faiths.

... it is the apocalyptic element to Ahmadinejad’s faith combined with Iran’s nuclear ambitions that should draw the most serious attention. He believes that a great cataclysm of bloodshed anticipates the return of the 12th Imam, in particular the destruction of infidels – Jews and Christians – that will usher in a new dawn of Islamic worldwide dominance.

With Israel in range of Iranian missiles, he has promised to "wipe Israel off the map". Here Ahmadinejad draws from what Andrew Bostom recently identified as a theological current within the broader confines of Islam that holds that the destruction of the Jews will inaugurate the appearance of the Mahdi". [continued...]
Posted by online_east, Wednesday, 27 May 2009 9:50:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Other Hojjatieh ideologues, such as one of Ayatollah Yazdi’s chief students, Mohsen Ghorourian, have openly advocated the use of nuclear weapons to assert Iranian/Islamic preeminence over Israel and the West...

Some commentators have dismissed the notion that Iran might launch an attack that would precipitate a catastrophic response from Israel and the US, relying on the Cold War logic of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). But yet again, the religious ideology that permeates the mind of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is extremely important to understand.

The whole structure of Shiite belief is built around a cult of martyrdom that assumes lethal retribution by the infidels against the true believers for their righteous conduct. Ahmadinejad constantly utilizes the Shiite images and slogans relating to martyrdom...

An attack launched by Israel or the US that would kill tens or hundreds of thousands of Iranians would only serve to confirm the self-fulfilling prophecy of Shiite martyrdom and vindicate Ahmadinejad’s suicidal policies. In his mind, an apocalyptic act of self-initiated martyrdom unparalleled in Islamic history would undoubtedly serve to jump start the arrival of the Mahdi. In his religious calculus, the use of nuclear weapons is a win-win scenario. Such actions are not only entirely appropriate, but divinely sanctioned and wholly justified by the messianic and apocalyptic elements that Ahmadinejad and his ideological allies have attached to the Shiite martyrdom mythology...

Because of this, we should understand that there is no negotiating position acceptable to them except for the complete and unconditional submission of the non-Muslim world to the rule of shari’a. Diplomacy is a vain illusion when dealing with adherents of this apocalyptic worldview. They have constructed an ideology where the most extreme actions on their part are not only justified, but divinely sanctioned; and all retributive responses by the “infidels” accounted for."

http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=3029

So much for Bashdar's call for "dialogue and diplomacy".
Posted by online_east, Wednesday, 27 May 2009 9:57:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In his rush to paint supposed Western hypocrisy over its reaction to Iranian nuclear plans, the author fails to mention a couple of key facts.

UN Security Council-led sanctions against Iranians are not based on the lack of international confidence in Iran's intentions. They are because Iran has continually lied to the IAEA. Part of Iran's obligations, from signing the NPT, is that it allows unfettered access to IAEA inspectors to all its nuclear sites. In addition, it declares all its nuclear activities. Iran hid its nuclear activities for 18 years. Since it was uncovered (not as a result of Iran declaring it, but revealed by an Iranian opposition group), Iran has consistantly refused unfettered access. It is in breach of its obligations under the NPT, hence the sanctions.

I might as well pre-empt the It's-all-Israel's-fault crowd by pointing out that Israel hasn't signed the NPT, so its development of nukes is completely legal.
Posted by Elder of Zion, Thursday, 28 May 2009 4:01:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
WTF

Iran signs the NPT while Israel refuses and the Israelis are the moral, legal ones. Talk about weasel words.
Posted by mikk, Friday, 29 May 2009 10:16:23 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I agree Mikk

Iran, like Israel, has the right to defend itself against Israel's regional nuclear dominance and against America's invade for oil tendency (Iraq first) in the Middle East.

Israel knows that America does its bidding. Part of America's Israeli mission is to use the NPT to prevent non-Israeli Middle Eastern countries from having a nuclear arsenal like Israel's.

The NPT consistently does not work - and the first country to break the intent of the NPT was Israel - that country that the Australian Parliament claps on a bipartisan basis each year.

Both Israel and its monster minion, America, might be more effective in the moral political debate if their double standards and blitzkrieg military tactics were note quite so assertive.

Pete
Posted by plantagenet, Tuesday, 9 June 2009 12:57:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy