Originally Posted by MellowGold
I'm sorry, but comparing the Iranian President to Hitler is absurd. There are big differences and you should be able to see them clearly.
I believe that it would be much more helpful if we look at the causes of the Muslim world's hate towards the west. Looking throughout history, we have continued to screw the Middle East time and time again after the Ottoman Empire fell. In the end, it is OUR fault that the Middle East is in the condition it is in now.
It is not a question of appeasement. It is simply a matter of not invading countries that do not like us.
Hitler spoke openly of his hatred of the Jews as does Ahmadinejad. Hitler tried to wipe the Jewish population in Europe and elsewhere out, Ahmadinejad speaks openly of wiping Israel off the map. The similarities between the two are scary and you should be able to see it.
Awesome, another appologist.
This has everything to do with appeasement. Prior to WWII Hitler was not allowed an air force but using Luftansa as a cover developed one. He put this on display at the Paris air show and scared the $hit out of the other European nations. But they did nothing to stop Hitler but sign treaties that were meaningless. Weeks later that air force rolled into Poland and WWII officially began.
Now we have a nutjob in Iran that wants nuclear weapons and is using the civilian nuclear energy program as a cover. Why does Iran need nuclear energy? They have more than enough oil to provide for their nation and others. Will the international community continue to placate them until a nuclear bomb gets set off in Tel Aviv? Then is it OK to do something?
This is not about invading countries we do not like. It is about preventing countries from doing harm in the future when they have clear intentions of doing so. If those countries comply like Libya or defy like Iraq. Libya is a classic example of how to behave and Iraq is a classic example of the consequences if you do not.