Based on the OP, the first reply (from someone who knows the difference between a debate and an opinion) & subsequent posts…why the hell hasn’t this thread been moved to IMHO?
[QUOTE=tomndebb]
His hope is that he will appear rational to some large pecentage on the American and world populace so that when Bush attempts to initiate the next crusade, it will be more difficult for Bush to gather more domestic support or international alliances.
The fact that Ahmidinejad is possibly even crazier than Bush with the same sort of monomaniacal interests and tunnel vision hemmed in by blind prejudices is not a factor in his desire to sway public opinion against Bush.
[/QUOTE]
Even if he is crazier, he is less dangerous – not only because Iran is a weaker power than the U.S., but because the presidency has less power within the government than it has here. The Supreme Leader, not the president, is the CinC of the armed forces and the one who gets to declare war or make peace.
[QUOTE=JohnBckWLD]
Based on the OP, the first reply (from someone who knows the difference between a debate and an opinion) & subsequent posts…why the hell hasn’t this thread been moved to IMHO?
[/QUOTE]
Because this sort of thread frequently does turn into a debate. I may yet move it, but I have moved threads in the past that came flying back over the wall at me when a few posters decided to take issue with each others’ opinions.
[QUOTE=tomndebb]
I may yet move it, but I have moved threads in the past that came flying back over the wall at me when a few posters decided to take issue with each others’ opinions.
[/QUOTE]
Flying back over the wall at you. Heh. I always carefully wrap them in a blanket before ringing the doorbell and running like hell.
[QUOTE=Shodan]
Only on the SDMB can you start a thread about a person who denies the Holocaust, believes that homosexuals should be killed (even if they don’t exist) and winds up his meetings by threatening the US, and the inevitable response is
How completely idiotic.
[/QUOTE]
I was sort of with you here, in that a response to this thread being “Bush sucks” is a pretty silly one. But looking back, the poster in question seems to be saying “Fuck Bush, because he’s allowing this bad guy to look better than he is”. “How dare someone make this bastard look good?”, was what I got out of it. Which seems to me to be a reasonable point and one in keeping with your own view of Ahmidinejad (which i’m sure most people here share).
Fuck Brown.
[QUOTE=marshmallow]
The lady doth protest too much, methinks.
[/QUOTE]
Are you suggesting that Victoria played for the Other Team? The only two couples of the period I can recall who were in love and happy with each other were Victoria and Albert and Nicholas and Alexandra. 
[QUOTE=carnivorousplant]
Are you suggesting that Victoria played for the Other Team? The only two couples of the period I can recall who were in love and happy with each other were Victoria and Albert and Nicholas and Alexandra.
[/QUOTE]
I hope you mean, “the only two royal couples.” Royal marriages being in most cases arranges for political, not romantic, reasons. In any case, Victoria/Albert and Nicholas/Alexandra do not belong to the same period. Alexandra, in fact, was Victoria’s granddaughter.
After the royal ass-whooping he got at Columbia today, he may have second thoughts about trying to manipulate American audiences for political gain.
Here’s some video of President Bollinger’s speech. It’s masterful.
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
I hope you mean, “the only two royal couples.” Royal marriages being in most cases arranges for political, not romantic, reasons. In any case, Victoria/Albert and Nicholas/Alexandra do not belong to the same period. Alexandra, in fact, was Victoria’s granddaughter.
[/QUOTE]
Picky, picky, picky.
[QUOTE=Revenant Threshold]
But looking back, the poster in question seems to be saying “Fuck Bush, because he’s allowing this bad guy to look better than he is”. “How dare someone make this bastard look good?”, was what I got out of it.
[/QUOTE]
Exactly. The United States of America, as it was a mere seven years ago, could not have provided a fraction of the opportunity for this scumbucket to score the points off us that he can do today.
People like that shouldn’t be afforded the opportunity to level such accusations against us, and have them be as true as they are. A “let’s be bad guys” approach to the world leaves us no standing to point the finger at bad guys.
That approach to life worked OK for Jayne Cobb because he wasn’t pointing the finger at anyone.
It seems simple to me. He can feel the direction of the wind, and wants to do whatever he can to both realize his nuclear ambitions AND not get bombed/invaded.
If you think about it, he’s not really a “badguy” anyway. He talks like a crazy mass murderer, but acts pretty reasonably. Our own government talks pretty reasonably, but acts like crazy mass murderers.
Why is Ahmidinejad doing so many interviews?
Because, rather like Steve Carell in “The Office,” he’s convinced that he’s a lot smarter, more likable, more charming and more funny than he really is.
The guy is CONVINCED of his own personal charisma and magnetism. He believes he’s a superb debater, and truly believes he’s running rings around his interviewers.
He has no idea how stupid/evil/insane he looks, and nobody close to him is going to clue him in.
[QUOTE=astorian]
He has no idea how stupid/evil/insane he looks, and nobody close to him is going to clue him in.
[/QUOTE]
Possibly not a wise career move.
[QUOTE=mlees]
Possibly not a wise career move.
[/QUOTE]
Indeed. When a space shuttle launched a spy satellite just before the First Gulf War, one would think some aide would have mentioned to Saddam, “Sir, they have Space Ships. We have second hand Russian tanks without night vision.”
I think that Ahmidinejad’s purpose is clear. This move is not intended to improve his standing with Americans in general, as even he knows that to be a hopeless cause. Rather, he is grandstanding in a way that is calculated to appeal to his home constituency. The vitriol unleashed upon him by our press and pundits can only improve his image back home and reinforce the notion that Americans are brutal, uncivilized, and cannot be mollified by appeals to reason.
[QUOTE=carnivorousplant]
Indeed. When a space shuttle launched a spy satellite just before the First Gulf War, one would think some aide would have mentioned to Saddam, “Sir, they have Space Ships. We have second hand Russian tanks without night vision.”
[/QUOTE]
Actually, I meant that a member of Ahmadinejad’s entourage is not going to tell their President that he may look like a bad movie villain, and that he is not as a good debater as he thinks he is, and expect to retire with their pension intact.
They would probably expect to pose for gun fire instead…
-XT
[QUOTE=carnivorousplant]
Indeed. When a space shuttle launched a spy satellite just before the First Gulf War, one would think some aide would have mentioned to Saddam, “Sir, they have Space Ships. We have second hand Russian tanks without night vision.”
[/QUOTE]
Saddam Hussein had good reason to believe we would not intervene in his solution to “the Kuwaiti problem.” It was a diplomatic mistake on our part, although it was understandable since our A and B-teams were more concerned about the breakup of the Soviet Union.
[QUOTE=xtisme]
They would probably expect to pose for gun fire instead…
-XT
[/QUOTE]
Ahmadinejad does not have that kind of power. No one person in the Iranian government does, actually, not since Khomeini passed on. Bollinger really showed his ignorance (or dishonesty) in calling Ahmadinejad a “dictator.”
On Bollinger’s politeness issue:
This mornings newspaper (The San Diego Union/Tribune) quotes Ahmadinejad as saying (at Columbia):