Israel and Iran - Will we see air strikes soon?

For one, he clearly does want that to happen. He might not say it outright, but he stated the next best thing when he called for the "Zionist regime" (which he uses interchangeably with Israel) to be wiped from the pages of history. We could sit here and argue about the smallest details of the translation, but the fact that we're having that discussion at all should be evidence (well actually, more evidence) of his irrationality and dedication to the extreme.

Well then why did you bring up Palestine in the first place?

Every single major policy initiative or strategy he has backed has been a complete and utter failure. He's the head of government in a theocracy. I think it's important to realize that we can't, and shouldn't, treat him as a reasonable man.

He doesn't care about Iran, and he's clearly averse to reason and common sense. Even if you don't think he'd actually do anything with it, it's unthinkable to let Iran acquire nuclear weapons. Every nation on the planet loses out in that scenario, including Iran, while a select few crazy motherfuckers (namely Ahmadinejad and the rest of his Revolutionary Guard ilk) benefit.

True, as I said before, even if they're not planning anything, they're making themselves pretty damn suspicious.

It's unthinkable to let anyone have nuclear weapons, or anything of the sorts. Yet they exist and have been used in the past.

I personally find it so interesting when people go "Oh when he said death to Israel, he was really talking about Zionism" I think a former local favorite forum member used to do it alot, and multiple source both west and eastern (even in Iran) state not only the presidents position but the supreme leader position to see Israel destroyed and off the map.

I love people's pro-palestine thoughts of every nation in the middle east loves palestine, and Israel is this most amazingly aggressive nation hell bend on destroying the world, and yet they haven't.

The ayatollah really has more power then him and Ahmadinejad has had a falling out with the political elites of Iran, to the point I don't expect him to ever come up in a realm of power again.

A nuclear Iran means a Nuclear Saudi Arabia, anyone who supports the Iran regime is an idiot.

Look at the video. I wonder who Israel is going to destroy those facilities... (not best source)
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...bunker-busting-bombs-as-iranian-threat-looms/

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/226141.html

Iran to unveil major nuclear achievement soon.

In the hands of competent individuals who realize the consequences of launching a nuke, they are not dangerous. But in the hands of somebody who has proven to be an irrational idiot who can sell the nuke to terrorists, there is no way we can let them have it.

So that makes it okay for Iran to have them? Don't apologize on their behalf just because you don't like Israel. Nobody wins if Iran gets a nuclear weapon.

And I never denied that he might want it to happen. I speculated rather than confirmed, but in no way is that an outright denial.

Merely as an example of a country which has been wiped off the map. Nothing more.

Likewise, it is important he is not written off as a fool. It is hard for a fool to gain power and even harder for them to retain it. Even Churchill made a number of monumental fuck-ups prior to becoming Prime Minister of the UK (not that I'm comparing Ahmadinejad with him).

Many politicians are in it for themselves first and foremost. Iran is no different.
It might be unthinkable, but it's looking more and more likely the unthinkable is going to happen, and no amount of sanctions will change that.

And if the unthinkable happens, I would go as far as saying that there would almost definitely be some kind of nuke going off.

Oh, believe you me, I'm the biggest IR realist around, but just because it's the natural and correct behavior of states to act in self interest doesn't mean that we should ignore actions by them that will clearly harm us all.

In the event that that's true, Israel will be more than justified in taking out Iranian nuclear sites. They will be obligated, for both their sake and ours.

They aren't dangerous? Being in the hands of people who know what damage they can do doesn't suddenly make them cuddly teddy bears. It doesn't matter what kind of people have nukes, they still have the capability to destroy anything in their path. The US, Russia and China combined have the power to wipe out the entirety of the Earth several times. Now explain to me how that can possibly be a good thing.

I don't know where from that statement you got this kind of response, but then again, I'm not surprised.
Anyway, I'm not defending Iran, nor do I dislike Israel (even though I do think creating it in that position wasn't the best idea), nor am I saying it's okay for Iran to have a nuke. Quite the contrary, I said no one should have one, no matter what the circumstances. However, I doubt we'll ever get rid of all of them.

I still don't know what Iran wants to accomplish with a single nuke, except spark an international conflict they cannot win. It's exactly as you said, everyone loses if they did manage to acquire one.

Why are you breaking down a post just to agree with it? It would make far more sense to quote one of mine, since it is my post you disagree with; even though you clearly don't fully understand it.
You obviously have a unique insight into my mindset if you can conclude that I think everyone loves the Palestinians, based on a reiterated statement of fact that Palestine has been wiped off the map.
Ahmadinejad has had disagreements with the Supreme Council. This itself is not indicative that he will be cast out into the wilderness; I think if that were the case it would have happened by now.
As for your last comment, I don't support the Iranian regime, which I have emphasised in subsequent posts. Get your facts right before implying I'm an idiot.

What about states which have nuclear weapons, but deny it? Like Israel?

Your main point that Iran developing nuclear weapons is bad in itself is somewhat valid. But the hypocrisy of a country which is not a signatory to the NPT, which does not have its nuclear capabilities inspected, threatening force against another country that's possibly trying to equal the playing field - thanks to their legitimate security concerns - is disgusting. With countries actively threatening them with attack (another illegal thing, called international terrorism -oops!), with a neighbouring country recently illegally invaded, it would be surprising if they weren't trying to develop a nuclear weapon for deterrence. However, are they actually developing a nuke? Well, US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta, just last month, said:

So it's nuclear independence they don't like? Not them getting a nuke? Fire up the jets - let's bomb these independence seeking fuckers!

To be clear, I'm not saying ignore Iran. I'm saying engage Iran diplomatically. Continue IAEA negotiations. Try to redress the hypocrisy. Say if Iran allows inspections so will Israel. Is that ever on the table? No. Because Iran = bad, Israel = good. Even though they're both supposedly doing the same thing.

Obviously I wasn't talking about aggressive in terms of using nuclear weapons. Jesus, you really have contempt for me to assume that I'd think something so ridiculous.

Israel has never threatened to use their nuclear weapons where Iran wants to wipe Israel off the map. So yes in this situation, Israel=Good and Iran=Bad.

Ugh. Not that mistranslation again.

"The regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time" is basically saying we want to wipe Israel off the map.

No he is obviously talking about the Zionist state, which is totally different from Israel.

Hoping a regime collapses is not the same as destroying a country and its people. I should not have to point that out.

It's like saying that the US wants Ahmadinejad's regime to collapse. Would you then say that they want to destroy the country? The key word is 'regime'.

Anyway this is all besides the point. Even if the Ayatollah did mean that Israel should be wiped off the map, that is not the same as the active and very real threats of the Israelis. Which is international terrorism and hypocrisy.

So you are saying that Israel is the bigger danger to the Middle East?