> Well, there’s the minor issue of Iran’s totalitarian regime consistently announcing their intent to destroy Israel and devestate the U.S.A, and taking actual steps to support the same.
Be wary of the narrative the media feeds you. There is a lot of spin on what is actually said in Iran and what is reported. For example:
The first article is mostly an opinion piece on the illegitimacy of Israel as a Jewish state.
> So the UN resolution was actually legally compromised and the partition plan was also completely unfair, giving out 70 percent of the land to the immigrant Jews who made up only 30 percent of the population at the time! (See 1947 UN Partition Proposal)
> So people only need to use their common sense to see how wrong this radical and bloody demographic implantation in the Arab world, called Israel, has been!
therefore, I would take whatever other factual claims this writer makes with a grain of salt, since anyone who reads his article can see a clear anti-Israeli agenda.
But even assuming his factutal statements regarding what Ahmadinejad said: that the occupation will vanish from the face of time, and not actually Israel, which is not the same as the occupation - anyone who is a bit versed in Middle-Eastern media knows that “the occupation” is just the way Israel is referred to. In very much the same way that the Iranian regime calls Israel and the U.S. “the small and big devils”. The writer’s point is moot. Any threat about the vanishing of the occupation is the same as the threat of the vanishing of Israel as a state.
The second article is a bit weird, as it seems to argue the finer points of translation:
> Khomeini gave a speech in which he said in Persian “Een rezhim-i eshghalgar-i Quds bayad az sahneh-i ruzgar mahv shaved.” This means, “This occupation regime over Jerusalem must vanish from the arena of time.” But then anonymous wire service translators rendered Khomeini as saying that Israel “must be wiped off the face of the map,” which Cole and Nourouzi say is inaccurate.
and
> In 2000, Khamenei stated, “Iran’s position, which was first expressed by the Imam [Khomeini] and stated several times by those responsible, is that the cancerous tumor called Israel must be uprooted from the region.” He went on to say in the same speech that “Palestinian refugees should return and Muslims, Christians and Jews could choose a government for themselves, excluding immigrant Jews.”
Wow, I’m so glad the Iranian regime only says that Israel along with the Jews living in it must vanish and be uprooted, but not wiped out.
To make things clear: I am against the control of Israeli military of territories with a Palestenian civilian majority in the West Bank, and I myself call that “occupation”. I believe Israel is very much at fault, even if it is not exclusive fault.
But that doesn’t excuse ignoring or defending actual threats to the very existence of Israel, which Iran does make, and act upon.
Stating that a country should not exist vs stating a country should be wiped off the map are drastically different things.
It's long been known that Iran doesn't recognize Israel as a country, just like Israel doesn't recognize Palestine, so there should be no surprise here.
I really don't understand why others really think the people of Iran have some overarching goal of attacking Israel and the US versus just trying to live their lives. What will that accomplish them?
Iran is a republic and must answer to it's people, which is why they participate in the international community by e.g. following the Non Proliferation Treaty and making trade deals with the rest of the international community. At the end of the day they don't want to be isolated and straddled with hyper inflation from sanctions just like most countries.
> Stating that a country should not exist vs stating a country should be wiped off the map are drastically different things.
You make the first sound very sterile. Aggressively saying one (a person or country) must not exist is not that far off from saying he must be wiped off, especially if you’re taking actual military steps against that subject.
> It's long been known that Iran doesn't recognize Israel as a country just like Israel doesn't recognize Palestine, so there should be no surprise here.
Who’s surprised? I just demonstrated the so-called receipts the parent OP said one must show.
Regardless, not recognizing something is very different from saying it must not exist and taking steps to advance that desired non-existence.
I think the Israeli regime is also evil in not allowing a Palestenian state to exist, even if it’s not Israel’s exclusive fault.
> I really don't understand why others really think the people of Iran have some overarching goal of attacking Israel and the US versus just trying to live their lives. What will that accomplish them?
I think it’s clear we are talking about the regimes here, not “the people”. Especially in autocratic Iran.
> Iran is a republic and must answer to it's people
False. [1]
> de jure:
Unitary Khomeinist presidential Islamic republic
> de facto:
Theocratic-republican authoritarian unitary presidential republic subject to a Supreme Leader
Be wary of the narrative the media feeds you. There is a lot of spin on what is actually said in Iran and what is reported. For example:
https://www.quora.com/Did-Irans-former-president-Ahmadinejad...
This was later revisited by WaPo:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/did-a...