You would think the Iranians would have learned after the Iranian Iraq war. And the moonbats wondered why we supported Iraq in the war. But hey, if it is going to help them prepare for Jesus, who am I to complain? Boy, are they in for a shock!

Gee, I wonder if Muslihoon has an opinion on this.

Nah, he wouldn't be interested in this.

IRAN'S leaders are CRAZY like libralls who want to play CHICKEN with nukes and OIL.

Gee, I wonder if Muslihoon has an opinion on this.

Another argument for wider margins.

Boy, did Muslihoon call this one. What was that name he had for the "preparer of the way for the Mahdi?" The Muckety-Mahdi or something.

In case you don't realize it, Ace, there are several exhaustive theological treatises on this exact topic lodged in your comment threads.

Better start working on your bandwidth fund raising drive.

You could call it "Make Room for Muslihoon"!

I'm curious, what do Iranians really think about this guy? What about Iranian expats?

What was that name he had for the "preparer of the way for the Mahdi?"

We call that one Muad'dib!

sandy, I have this great book called "We Are Iran" which covers Iranian blogs. Parts of it handle exactly that topic, up to summer of 2005.

So, to answer your question, back then they were apathetic (only about 15% of the population voted) but were happy to see someone run on an anti-corruption message.

The impression I'm getting from that book, and from what I've seen elsewhere, is that the "reform" movement consisted of an alliance between ethicist and secularist factions. The former faction was the popular one and the latter faction supplied the organisational skills. The clerical faction meanwhile consisted of an alliance between true believers and crooks.

As late as early last year, the loonies and crooks were stuck together and the secular/reformists looked to be winning against them.

Now, thanks to "I'm a Mahdi Nutjob", it looks like there's been a realignment. The true-believing clerical faction has co-opted the anti-corruption faction. The secularists are going to get hounded out of existence. The crooks will hide, to show themselves again when Ahmadinejad's internal jihad is complete.

"everybody knows the war is over... everybody knows the good guys lost" -- Leonard Cohen

David Ross made very good points. I am not, frankly, surprised by what Ahmadinezhad said. I am still puzzled what Ahmadinezhad's intentions are: is he saying this to provoke an international reaction or because he truly believes it, or perhaps both? *shrug* Either way, his regime must fall.

For all the left's worry about George W. Bush's "divine mission," they sure are silent as mice about this confirmed nutter.

Uh, I think most leftists will agree that they're both pretty stupid.

Uh, I think most leftists will agree that they're both pretty stupid.

How brave of you.

LOL, Sortelli! Well, at least Bush's divine mission is a force of good. The Shiites want to blow everything up.

Certainly we should give this nice Persian gentleman the bomb. Just provide us with a GPS address and we'll have one sent, express delivery.

The US fundamentalists want the jews to get on with building the third temple. These are evangelical or Pentecostals who believe the building of the Third Temple on the Temple Mount will bring on the end of days. Some Jewish groups are also pushing for the re-building which is associated with the return of their saviour. This on top of the Iranians hoping for the Mahdi. Lots of groups favoring the apocalypse makes me a bit nervous. Maybe because I'm definitely going to be "left behind."

Well, at least Bush's divine mission is a force of good.

Heh heh. Yeah. Our crazed religious nutters and their evil corporate masters sure have a funny way of leaving elections in the place of tyrants while they're out stealing all that oil.

Lots of groups favoring the apocalypse makes me a bit nervous.

Why is that? It seems to have provided you with a lovely strawman to argue against.

Mikey, I think there's a package deal in the works, 24 for the price of one. The first one's free and we throw in the shipping.

Sortelli, all these people pushing for the Apocalypse make me nervous too. Something about a bunch of nutjobs who think they won't live to see the consequences of their actions, combined with how violently some people react when disappointed. It gets this little voice in my head going "The Almighty tells me he can get me out of this mess, but he's pretty sure you're fucked."

Eh. The US and Israel keep pretty close tabs on apocalyptic groups. They're stopped. (I believe some people were deported/arrested by Israel for plotting some major event as 2000 was dawning.) But when a state's entire government is an apocalyptic movement - who's going to stop them?

Interesting. When Khatami was president it was clear he had no power, now that the new president says stupid and scary things it is clear that he is in total control. Is the implication that it is OK for Khatami to have the bomb but not the crazy new president?

You have make your fearmongering more consistent, or at least logical.

Searp, back when Khatami was still in power President Bush stated ,on the record, that "Iran would not get the bomb no matter what it took". The only reason we have stepped up the "fear ongering" is because
Ahmadinezhad is a nutter and they are very much closer to having the bomb. Both are good reasons to be a little more strident for our call to arms IMHO.

Muslihoon,
Do you really not believe that there are a large number of "end-of-days" believers in the current US administration? The Reagan adminstration had a few, and I never bought the argument that it was just calculated crazy-talk to scare the Russians.
(I agree that the current leadership in Iran cannot be allowed to obtain even a single nuclear weapon - they are religious nuts, and anyone who buys into the stupid holocaust revisionist stuff (let alone zionist conspiracy arguments) is just, well, too stupid to be allowed control of nuclear weapons .)

Bill, you better not be thinking of James Watt. He intended his comments on Jesus's return as a poetic flourish. He was talking about the apocalypse as an event in a mythical future. He was not talking about bringing it about himself. Shit, I talk about the Mahdi on occasion. And I'm a Jewish / Christian agnostic.

As for searp: the powerlessness of Khatami and of Khatami's parliament was demonstrated on a weekly basis, every time the clerics barred people from running, from voting, and from seeing their legislation from taking effect. The clerics have not forced any sort of showdown with Ahmadi Nejad, because (as far as I can tell) half of them agree with A.N. and the other half are praying that they won't get dismembered like the common thieves they are.

Let's have a little less moral equivalence and a little more study of what is actually going on in Iran, please. If I'm wrong, offer a counter argument. If I'm wrong on this account, believe me, I'd be very very happy.

The beauty of American politicians is that one cannot easily tell rhetoric from speaking from the heart. The US would never let an "end-of-days" person hijack US foreign policy. Unless he's explicitly voted into office for that purpose.

searp brings up a good point. Frankly, having a reformer would be a much easier and effective way to develop nuclear military technology. The mullahocracy can act with impunity while protected by a supposedly reformist facade. A.N. is really to their disadvantage, in a way.