The President of Iran's Letter to President Bush...

[Makalakumu]

Here it is...

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0510-21.htm

Very interesting stuff. What do you think?

 

[terryl965]

All I can say is wow!
Terry

 

[mantis]

All I can say is wow!
Terry

in what way, sir?

 

[Bob Hubbard]

That is one very interesting read.

 

[mantis]

That is one very interesting read.

this is so funny.
no one wants to say what they think. all comments are "interesting" haha.

i find it amazing that someone actually took the time to look that up and post it here, and then people (3 so far) actually read it.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Ok. I think he makes some excellent observations, and numerous valid points. He is appealing to Bush's faith, and for him to see the disconnect between the actions of his (Bush) administration, and the teachings his (Bush) faith holds dear. His observations on the lies and deceits surrounding the Iraq conquest are IMO right on the money as well.

 

[mrhnau]

Its quite simple, and a potential conflict can be easily avoided. Complete transparency of their nuclear programs. If indeed they are having only peaceful intentions with their nuclear power, thats fine, but I still hold to a saying thats proven useful... "trust, but verify".

The same thing happened with Iraq. They refused inspectors and kept things as ambiguous as possible. They would not allow inspectors at places that needed to be inspected and kept trying to shoot down our planes. the result? A kingdom at war. I would very much prefer for this to -not- happen in Iran, but unless things improve we will be heading in that direction.

 

[Makalakumu]

This is part of what the Leader of one of the Nations in the "Axis of Evil" had to say to our President...

Mr. President,

In countries around the world, citizens provide for the expenses of governments so that their governments in turn are able to serve them.


The question here is what has the hundreds of billions of dollars, spent every year to pay for the Iraqi campaign, produced for your citizens?
As your Excellency is aware, in some states of your country, people are living in poverty. Many thousands are homeless and unemployment is a huge problem. Of course these problems exist – to a larger or lesser extent – in other countries as well. With these conditions in mind, can the gargantuan expenses of the campaign – paid from the public treasury – be explained and be consistent with the aforementioned principles?

What has been said are some of the grievances of the people around the world, in our region, and in your country. But my main contention – which I am hoping you will agree to some of it – is: those in power have specific time in office, and do not rule indefinitely, but their names will be recorded in history and will be constantly judged in the immediate and distant futures.

The people will scrutinize our presidencies.

Did we manage to bring peace, security, and prosperity for the people, or insecurity and unemployment? Did we intend to establish justice, or just support special interest groups, and by forcing many people to live in poverty and hardship, make a few people rich and powerful – thus trading the approval of the people and the Almighty with theirs? Did we defend the rights of the underprivileged or ignore them? Did we defend the rights of all people around the world or impose wars on them, interfere illegally in their affairs, establish hellish prisons and incarcerate some of them? Did we bring the world peace and security or raise the specter of intimidation and threats? Did we tell the truth to our nation and others around the world or present an inverted version of it? Were we on the side of the people or the occupiers and oppressors? Did our administration set out to promote rational behavior, logic, ethics, peace, fulfilling obligations, justice, service to the people, prosperity, progress, and respect for human dignity, or the force of guns. Intimidation, insecurity, disregard for the people, delaying the progress, and excellence of other nations, and trample on people's rights? And finally, they will judge us on whether we remained true to our oath of office – to serve the people, which is our main task, and the traditions of the prophets – or not?
Mr. President,

How much longer can the world tolerate this situation? Where will this trend lead the world to? How long must the people of the world pay for the incorrect decisions of some rulers? How much longer will the specter of insecurity – raised from the stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction – hunt the people of the world? How much longer will the blood of the innocent men, women, and children be spilled on the streets, and people's houses destroyed over their heads? Are you pleased with the current condition of the world? Do you think present policies can continue?
If the billions of dollars spent on security, military campaigns, and troop movement were instead spent on investment and assistance for poor countries, promotion of health, combating different diseases, education and improvement of mental and physical fitness, assistance to the victims of natural disasters, creation of employment opportunities and production, development projects and poverty alleviation, establishment of peace, mediation between disputing states and distinguishing the flames of racial, ethnic, and other conflicts, were would the world be today? Would not your government and people be justifiably proud? Would not your administration's political and economic standing have been stronger? And I am most sorry to say, would there have been an ever increasing global hatred of the American governments?

People and nations are much deeper then the absolutist "good and evil" paradigm that our President and our countries media would have us believe. This letter has not been made available to the American Citizen via the mainstream media. I had to go to alternative sources to find it. Anyone wonder why after reading it?

I do not think that this letter excuses Iran from any human rights abuses they may have committed. However, I think that it does a great job in pointing out the many contradictions and ironies of the current situation. And I think that it portrays the utter absurdity of terms like "axis of evil."

Who would have thunk that the President of Iran would have asked President Bush many of the same questions that I would have asked?

 

[Makalakumu]

Its quite simple, and a potential conflict can be easily avoided. Complete transparency of their nuclear programs. If indeed they are having only peaceful intentions with their nuclear power, thats fine, but I still hold to a saying thats proven useful... "trust, but verify".

The same thing happened with Iraq. They refused inspectors and kept things as ambiguous as possible. They would not allow inspectors at places that needed to be inspected and kept trying to shoot down our planes. the result? A kingdom at war. I would very much prefer for this to -not- happen in Iran, but unless things improve we will be heading in that direction.

So, do you think that all of the other issues brought up in the letter are "smoke and mirrors" used to hide the nuclear program issues? That is the impression I get from this post, please correct me if I'm wrong...

BTW - the only reports I've seen of this in the mainstream media gave that same impression.

 

[mantis]

Its quite simple, and a potential conflict can be easily avoided. Complete transparency of their nuclear programs. If indeed they are having only peaceful intentions with their nuclear power, thats fine, but I still hold to a saying thats proven useful... "trust, but verify".

The same thing happened with Iraq. They refused inspectors and kept things as ambiguous as possible. They would not allow inspectors at places that needed to be inspected and kept trying to shoot down our planes. the result? A kingdom at war. I would very much prefer for this to -not- happen in Iran, but unless things improve we will be heading in that direction.

that's not too accurate. because saddam did let the investigators in for a long time.
I think even if iran shows complete good faith that is not going to change a thing. Presentations can be made up in front of the security councel again.

 

[mrhnau]

So, do you think that all of the other issues brought up in the letter are "smoke and mirrors" used to hide the nuclear program issues? That is the impression I get from this post, please correct me if I'm wrong...

BTW - the only reports I've seen of this in the mainstream media gave that same impression.

I think its a diversionary tactic to distract the US population. This letter was not intended for Bush. You mention that the media is not publishing it, and I don't think the media should be a puppet for him. I get irked when the media publishes the Bin Laden videos/tapes for the same reasons. You propogating the letter here is doing the same thing.

We live in a wonderful, but also scary time. We (mankind) have the power to destroy so much with enough money and time. I don't want nuclear arms in the hands of someone reckless enough to use them or sell them to those who will. Conventional weapons are bad enough, I don't want someone crazy enough to try and blow up Israel or anyone else they don't agree with armed with weapons that will spark unprecedented destruction.

Other countries have them. They are in general rational enough to not use them. India and Pakistan got them during a confrontation, and both had the rational not to use them. Many people, including myself, feel that radical Islamists are not rational enough in their hatred of Israel and the US to refrain from the usage of WMD. Are we threatening to invade if they get improved conventional weapons? I doubt it.

So, I state again. Transparency is the solution. If Iran wants to prevent problems, then be transparent. Its simple, effective and prevents problems from the UN and US. So, why do you think they are so opposed to it? Can you honestly tell me that you believe Iran will peacefully maintain a nuclear arsenal? And not allow the sale of those arms to terror groups?

Something I notice about the letter. Much of it attacks/discusses the policy based on Christianity and Christian principles. The removal of Saddam was not based on scripture, but rather for the good of the region (and on supposed bad intel). The US is not governed -strictly- by the Bible, nor does Bush base his decisions solely on the Bible. Can we say the same about Iran (with regard to the quaran/islamic fundamentalism)?

 

[Marginal]

I think its a diversionary tactic to distract the US population. This letter was not intended for Bush. You mention that the media is not publishing it, and I don't think the media should be a puppet for him. I get irked when the media publishes the Bin Laden videos/tapes for the same reasons. You propogating the letter here is doing the same thing.

IMO, it breaks down when you put it in its place next to the same guy's claims that the holocost never happened etc.

 

[Xue Sheng]

this is so funny.
no one wants to say what they think. all comments are "interesting" haha.

The article is....... interesting

 

[michaeledward]

Its quite simple, and a potential conflict can be easily avoided. Complete transparency of their nuclear programs. If indeed they are having only peaceful intentions with their nuclear power, thats fine, but I still hold to a saying thats proven useful... "trust, but verify".

The same thing happened with Iraq. They refused inspectors and kept things as ambiguous as possible. They would not allow inspectors at places that needed to be inspected and kept trying to shoot down our planes. the result? A kingdom at war. I would very much prefer for this to -not- happen in Iran, but unless things improve we will be heading in that direction.

Have the United States, Russia, France, China, Great Britian, Isreal, India, or Pakistan agreed to 'Complete Transparency of their nuclear programs'? Do these countries, in possession of nuclear weapons allow inspectors in all of their facilities?

It makes one wonder why we demand that of others.

 

[mrhnau]

Have the United States, Russia, France, China, Great Britian, Isreal, India, or Pakistan agreed to 'Complete Transparency of their nuclear programs'? Do these countries, in possession of nuclear weapons allow inspectors in all of their facilities?

It makes one wonder why we demand that of others.

[Sarcasm] Lets sell them at Wal-Mart! You got the cash, have the nukes! [/Sarcasm]

We know they have nukes, and we know they secure them (with the possible exception of Russia). We also know they are not deploying them readily. So, I ask again. Can we say the same about Iran?

 

[terryl965]

Ok. I think he makes some excellent observations, and numerous valid points. He is appealing to Bush's faith, and for him to see the disconnect between the actions of his (Bush) administration, and the teachings his (Bush) faith holds dear. His observations on the lies and deceits surrounding the Iraq conquest are IMO right on the money as well.

Bob I could not have said it better
Terry

 

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Have the United States, Russia, France, China, Great Britian, Isreal, India, or Pakistan agreed to 'Complete Transparency of their nuclear programs'? Do these countries, in possession of nuclear weapons allow inspectors in all of their facilities?

It makes one wonder why we demand that of others.

Israel claims not to have ANY nuclear weapons, yet the world is sure they do and they don't allow for inspections nor does the UN require these inspections. No one brought India to the table when they developed them and Pakistan did it to "balance" the power deficit.

The US does not submit to these inspections either. When I get a chance I'll look up the article that states this and post it.

 

[Makalakumu]

One of the things that I'm struggling with is whether or not this letter is a sincere attempt at communication or if it is just another political shot. If one believes that it is sincere, then a whole set of assumptions regarding Iran breaks down. If it is just politics, then they do not.

Attempting to differentiate between the two has been very difficult. The amount of blatent propaganda in the US media about Iran is pretty large...(which in and of itself is disturbing considering all historical examples). So, what is the truth? Is this letter sincere or political? Or both? Which would put an entirely different spin on everything.

 

[Nebuchadnezzar]

So, do you think that all of the other issues brought up in the letter are "smoke and mirrors" used to hide the nuclear program issues? That is the impression I get from this post, please correct me if I'm wrong...

BTW - the only reports I've seen of this in the mainstream media gave that same impression.

No, this would do nothing to blind the people to the nuclear issue. It does however remind people of the hypocracy and double standard of the "Bush Administration". Not the American people, but it's leader.

 

[mrhnau]

One of the things that I'm struggling with is whether or not this letter is a sincere attempt at communication or if it is just another political shot. If one believes that it is sincere, then a whole set of assumptions regarding Iran breaks down. If it is just politics, then they do not.

Attempting to differentiate between the two has been very difficult. The amount of blatent propaganda in the US media about Iran is pretty large...(which in and of itself is disturbing considering all historical examples). So, what is the truth? Is this letter sincere or political? Or both? Which would put an entirely different spin on everything.

nothing but political. If it were sincere, he would have sent it to Bush. Open letters have marginal believability, at least in my book. Just for image or propoganda.