Iran Crisis

"Le Monde" is the most serious and respectable French newspaper, in the same vein as the London Times or the Washington Post. Therefore I do believe this the real letter.

This part caught my eye:

"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 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?"

Very well said.

But I do not see a mention of us aethiests anywhere... monotheism yes, but not aetheism, oh well.

This letter read as very sincere and educated.  It's strange how this letter has only reached Le Monde, don't people care?


Edited by Geck0 - May 12 2006 at 15:16

Grauniad?  I presume you mean Guardian?

I've always quite liked that paper.

Geck0 wrote: This part caught my eye: "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 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?"

Gecko - the Guardian has long been known as the Grauniad because of its one-time notoriety for printing errors.

Incidentally, I'm not sure why anyone seriously expected the letter in question to achieve anything. I can't think of any historical precedent for a letter from one sadly deluded religious nutter to another sadly deluded religious nutter having any practical effect.

NetsNJFan wrote: Blacksword wrote: He was 'alleged' to have called for Israel to be 'wiped off the map' though. I dont know if this was ever confirmed. As far as I'm concerned he is no more untrustowrthy as Bush & Blair. It wasn't alleged.   He said it, right in front of a banner that said "A World Without Zionism" - he's a typical Arab leader(King Abdullah excluded, hes a great guy) who are able to use Israel/USA/UK to turn attention away from their own failings.

Ok. I didn't actually see that.

He certainly has failings, I'll not deny it, but I still regard him as no more of a threat than our own leaders.
    

Not sure, Gecko, how you define integrity in this instance.

I'm rooting for Iran in this one.

Discussions between permenant Security Council members, and Germany were held in London yesterday. Our media accidentally forgot to report it, I guess. Thankfully the stability of the ME, global security and the possibility of economic collapse is not really that important..


This article hi-lights the fact that there are big differences in opinion between the Moscow and Washington in the best way forward. Iran is insisting on it's right to a nuclear power program. The Russian idea of allowing the low level Uranium enrichment to take place in Russia, is still on the table, but may be rejected by Iran.

    London talks

Edited by Blacksword - May 25 2006 at 08:12