'Quake Aid offered to Iran form US and or Israell

With Iran named one of the axis of evil, does the US and/or Israel offer aid to the people of Iran after the deadly earthquake?


Not from everybody.

The Jerusalem Post
Dec. 27, 2003

Iran rebuffs ‘Zionist’ help
by Herb Keinon


Iran refused Israeli help in dealing with its catastrophic earthquake,
saying the Islamic Republic would accept aid from all countries of the
world, except Israel.

Jahanbakhsh Khanjani, a spokesman for Iran’s Interior Ministry, said, “THE


Kind of hard to accept aid from people you want to annihilate. The best way to help the Iranian people would be to liquidate their government.

And the Israeli Gvt. And then force the populations to cross-breed and remove religious zeal with the help of electro-shock therapy. Then you name them all Kim (works for both boys and girls) and move them back to the united Iraniel (or Isran) and they live happily ever after :slight_smile:

They will all flinch if someone mentions god and they won’t be able to tell the difference between eachother. This should work, but don’t blame me for any damaging side effects.

Rafsanjani did say he wanted to nuke the Israelis.

That link from the Iranian Press Service says he didn’t really say that. Just that an Iranian nuke would change some of the dynamics of the Middle East… but not real diplomatically. Something like “One nuke would destroy Israel, while the Islamic world would survive the retaliation.”

Which seems goofy, Pakistan and India don’t even have H-bombs (or what ever the terminology is now) and one A-bomb won’t “destroy” Israel.

originally posted by Sam H.

You are perfectly right. A nuke would certainly change the dynamics of the Middle East.

But, so what?

A nuke in the middle of my bedroom would also change the dynamics of my local scenery, somewhat.

From what you have written, I am convinced that you don’t really understand the political, or even the physical, implications of such actions on the surrounding parts of the planet.

By the way. Rafsanjani did say that, and I, being a devout believer in believing that religious nutballs mean what they say, when they have real power, I am convinced that he meant what he said.

Of casual interest, why are the Iranians refusing help from the “Little Satan” (Israel) and accepting it from the “Great Satan” (The United States, et al).

What convinced you? My sloppy writing? I apologize.

I think I do understand… bad things. Strife and war like we’ve never seen. I wasn’t trying to be flip.

If the quotes are accurate (?) he never actually made the threat, but he got as damn close as anyone ever has. Still, I believe he wants to annihilate Israel. I’m convinced he meant what he didn’t say!

“If a day comes when the world of Islam is duly equipped with the arms Israel has in possession, the strategy of colonialism would face a stalemate because application of an atomic bomb would not leave any thing in Israel but the same thing would just produce minor damages in the Muslim world.”

“The West’s support for Israel is liable to bring about World War III, which will be fought between those believers who seek a martyr’s death, on the one hand, and those who represent the epitome of arrogance on the other hand”

Anyone questioning Iran’s place in the Axis of Evil is deluded. He is threating suicide bombing on a national level.


I think it’s because Iran and the US have quietly come to a short-term arrangement vis-a-vis Iraq.

The US realizes that without the Shiites’ support, it doesn’t have a prayer in Iraq. Another fact is that the Iranian government probably realizes that their hold on power is slowly eroding as the Iranian people grow more restless with life under a theocracy (and the American military on both their western and eastern borders.

By coming to a tacit agreement with the Iranians, the US gains a quiet ally against the Sunnis who are fueling the current insurgency. By coming to a tacit agreement with the US, Iran protects its border for a while.

The uncertainty to both countries is how this short term deal will play in the long-term, but both figure they will cross that bridge when they come to it.

I just thoght that was a brilliant sentence :smiley:
Anyway, yeah, maybe something good will come from this great tragedy. It should lowere resentment between parts of the Middle East and the US at least.

It does illustrate how far the region has to go to get to real peace, when the hate runs so deep that the Iranian governement would rather let their people suffer more, after they already have a death toll of about 25,000, than to accept any help from Israel. Wow.

Since Israel recently had the arrogance to state they are prepared to pre-emptive strike at Iran "trying to avoid to make civilian casualties( (how nice, no?) and in this arrogance was once again a good student of the USA…
What would you expect the official standpoint of Iran towards the Zionists would be?

Or is it your standpoint that both the USA and Israel can bomb around wherever they like and that their targets must be glad to be their targets?

I know, one isn’t offered every day to witness the exiting spectacle of some sofisticated bomb flying by, destroying a bit of your country and making “colateral damage”…
But neverhteless… I think some realism and honesty in the comments posted here can’t hurt.

Salaam. A

By the way: Iran stated they would retaliate immediately when Israel dares to attack them.

Do you think they should let themselves be attacked or do you think they should answer in kind.

Do you think that an attack on a country by an other country is less then a declaration of war because a bomb comes without words, just kills and destroys.

Salaam. A

I’m curious: have you actually read any of this thread? 25,000 Iranians have died, and Israel offers humanitarian aid (which to me, doesn’t mean people on the ground, it means boxes of food and medicine and the like). And Iran refused. That’s it, that’s what we are talking about. The military situation is complicated, but any nation in the world has the right to defend itself from imminent threat. Iran developing a nuclear program, coupled with past threats of using said program against Israel, I think to the whole world demonstrates imminent threat. But this thread is not about imminent threat or the military situation. It is about the pathetic state of the region when you are refusing help while tens of thousands are injured and dying because of religious extremism.

Just a quick question. Do you think if the reverse were true – if Israel was devastated by an earthquake – Iran would offer aid? Why or why not do you believe this?

Darwinian natural selection is slowly but surely weeding out the idiots.

In another 1500 years, it may be possible to find two people in the Middle East, of different faiths, that will not try to massacre each others children at the drop of a hat.

But I doubt it.


Iran asked the whole world for help excluding in this a government that made it clear that Iran should be attacked pre-emptively and that they are ready to do just that.

Today, because of the weather conditions (freezing temperatures) and the way the buildings collapsed it is already seen as unlikely for people still living under that rubble.

There is at place - besides the Iranian efforts - a UN coordinated help for survivors and wounded and more is on its way from all over the world.
So I think you shouldn’t dramatize that much the refusal to invite also Israel to take part in that, as if Israeli aid would make “the difference” overthere for all those victims.

The Israely government however transferred their sympathy and concolences through the normal diplomatic channels.

In my opinion exactly the same would happen if a similar catastrophy would hurt Israel.

And to your remark that you see the most unclear and unproved claims that Iran would devellop a nuclear program already as an “imminent threat” to Israel, I would like to ask you:
Then how do you see the most imminent and clearly expressed threat of Israel to attack Iran, Israel being in possession of such weapons and unwilling to provide information about their program to the international community?

I know that is off topic, so if you don’t like to answer because it would side-track this discussion, I accept that of course since it is a valid argument.

Salaam. A

Still no answer, I see.


So you are saying that earthquakes should wipe out the whole region or what exactly are you trying to bring across?

In my opinion you are saying that you would like me, my wives and children, my whole family and all I can think of and all I don’t know and thus can not personally think of to be killed in an earthquake.
Thank you for being so kind to wish that we would meet God so quickly.
I don’t think I’m inclined to wish you the same.

Salaam. A

M. Ellis…

If yourefer to my answer to an other member, you should re-read it. If it isn’t clear, I can always make a drawing if that is possible on this website.

Salaam. A