If nothing else, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a brilliant rhetorician. In a debate, he would most likely mop the floor with Bush--jacket bulge and all.

Given, denying the Holocaust, or even questioning the validity of it, is crazy talk, but you have to respect the guy's intelligence.

Yes, he's a spinmaster, but so is our president. "Peace" is a big word, and our efforts at peace in Iraq are so far falling far short of what my definition of peace is. Maybe the Iranian Pres. has a better plan than the West?

I wish I could say more, but I'm a bit of a novice on the subject, and Salon conversations tend to leave my head hot. The interview was top notch though, and besides the "such as" question in the beginning, concerning the upcoming soccer game (which sounded like a high school interview) the bulk of it was invigorating.

Thanks.

Is the nuclear card so many letter writers are willing to play being used merely as a negotiating ploy - saber rattling - to reach accommodation? Or is it a genuine threat? Regardless of its purpose it's the kind of behavior closer to the nature of a school yard bully than a first rate nation that doesn't have to resort to such needless contentiousness. Ahmadinejad may be everything his critics here have claimed, but does that necessitate treating this situation like it's a World Wrestling match? The world has spent the last 3,000 years accruing logic and rationales to further a higher sense of humanity, granted not all of them fair and wise, so we could end up like cavemen with clubs in our hands willing to smash skulls when others don't conform to our wishes. How pathetic.

The most significant lapse in behavior regarding this issue is the hesitancy of history's most educated society - America - to respond with intelligence and strategic wisdom. This Let's-Whip-Some-Ass 'Tude has isolated us from most of our allies except for Blair, who's reign will soon end in a vote of no confidence when it's clear what a disaster Basra and the Iraqi war has been for Britain. And then who's on board with these macho maneuvers? You can smell the disintegration in the air. Once the Christian right can no longer deny just how unchristian our foreign policy is, this whole approach will tumble like a row of dominos. And that's just what Ahmadinejad was sensing in his letter to Bush, asking, How can Christians act this way? Hey, if you're going to haul out the Bible and tout your religiosity, then expect equal treatment. The Iranians still haven't forgotten that Reagan imported a Bible when he was handling the hostage crisis, not that long after the Shah was imposed on them by imperialists manipulating their society.

What if Iran had imposed a figure like the Shah on the U.S. to control our markets for decades? Would we have forgotten that? What if Iran had armed Mexico with chemical weapons to attack us the way we armed Iraq with WMDs to attack Iran? Would that quickly pass without notice? In retrospect, Iranians, despite the hostage taking, were rather complacent when you consider America's support of the secular dictator, and nominal Sunni, Saddam Hussein, who oppressed and tortured their Shia brethren in Iraq, many of whom were blood relatives. Would the people of El Paso be so understanding if their Christian relatives were being massacred in Juarez by a secular regime? Would Israelis have sat still if Palestinians were crushing their relatives across the border?

America's manipulative imperialist foreign policy for the past 50 years or so, from United Brands to ITT, from Allende to the overthrow of Diem, from boycotting Castro and gradually alienating Central and South America to supporting Afghanistan's Mujaheddin and seeding terrorist cells, has not been forgotten by the rest of the world. Granted, it's not nearly in the same league as Germany's tragic turn, but, nonetheless, like the Germans in this interview who openly acknowledge and regret the Holocaust, America likewise should come clean about its transgressions. Since the U.S. hasn't done that, then figures like Ahmadinejad - a cardboard president in secular garb with few real powers - can conveniently highlight a litany of American double standards and discredit our standing in the world. Why give him or anyone else the chance to do it? Why run from these issues like the kid caught with his hand in the cookies jar? A representative at the highest level ought to be telling the world, Yeah we took the cookies and here's why. Instead, it appears, most critics are relying on character assassination, hoping he'll go away. It won't work.

Why not do as he suggests and conduct a sort of global Holocaust tutorial? After all, he may be outrageous but he speaks for many Muslims who believe it's a contrived event. Why not settle the issue once and for all in a sort of cultural exchange program? Force him to back down, and shut the Islamic critics up with a reservoir of facts instead of incredulity and reflexive charges of antiSemitism. From their point of view, the secular West is scientific and based on rationality with a thin layer of religion on top. Why not act in accordance to that Western rationality and conduct a lengthy demonstration that will prove empirically and universally that the Holocaust is undeniable instead of shouting and calling names? Why escalate the aggression when the cold facts will suffice?

"I do not understand the question", etc. He redirects or does nto argue. He DOES deny the Holocaust happened by arguing that there are two sets of scholars, and that the supporters are politically motivated.

He's a Nazi sympathizer, and he uses the phrase "Zionist network" "Zionist influence", etc. Change the nationality, and this man sounds like an Aryan Nations/KKK promoter.

The Palestinians could have stayed in Israel, and many did. Jordan/Eqypt/Syria have attacked Israel multiple times, and lost each time. This man is the same as any Klansman/Confederate sympathizer. He believes the Jews are inferior. He has argued in the past for their annhiliation.

Bush is clearly corrupt and connected to the Abramoff scandal. This guy is evil. Bush is indifferent and wholly owned by corporations. This man is actively promoting evil, murder, and nuclear war. Bush's administration pushes BS with a wink and a nod to enrage the Left; this man has in the past promoted new genocide. His letters have been accurately set in the historic offer of surrender to Islam or die. He does not want a dialogue; he wants to delay reprisal until he can get a working delivery system. We saw this tactic of negotitation and threat in the Korean and Vietnam conflicts. He is not the popular choice of Iranians- they have no choice. The mullahs control him, and this is what the mullahs want to hear.

Do not let anger at Bush blind you to the danger of this man. They only thing keeping him from nuking us is the lack of a delivery system. These are true believers, and they think that the US, the Great Satan, is decadent. They do not believe in rule of the people, because it interferes with a dictatoship of the mullahs.

Iran is dangerous, and may have manuevered the Bush administration into a war that has advantaged Iran. The CIA has shown compelling evidence that Chalabi, our major source for the Irqi nucleau program, was an Iranian plant. We foolishly took out the balance of power, the stay against Iranian power.

Do not fear Bush more than Iran's government. Bush is within the power of the US to correct; he is not competent enough to wreck the havoc an unchecked Iran can. The Constitution limits the ability of the right wing extremists to impose their will. The only check against this man is a nuke, and most of our nukes are aimed at Russia. We have wasted time on Iraq when the realy rogue state was next door.

Time to reorient the launchers.