There are so many things untold around Mahmoud's love and Passion for George in this letter that has to be read between the lines!!!
Lonely days are gone, my baby wrote me a letter.
viva fouman.com

The letter never mentions their weapons programs, it is just a cut and paste of democratic national committee talking point. I think he is Nancy Pelosi without the moustache. The press really like Iran, hates Bush, never read the letter, and lied to their readers. Shameful reporting. It was as much a diplomatic overture as Ted Kozinski's "letter" to the New York Times.

That "Burro" president in the white house don't know how to react in a constructive way to anything does he...

I was intrigued by the letter, before I learned of its contents. I must say that it makes a good case against some US actions (ie the non-existent WMDs in Iraq). However, the letter is just a restatement of position. Irans wants to develop nuclear capabilities and wants Israel to be wiped off the map. The US opposes both goals.

I am certain that Bush will sent a secret envoy to ascertain what can be agreed upon. It seems as if it is a great opportunity to spin it in our favor. I just hope the cowboy attitude is put to rest for a while.

The letter, it appears, has far too many references to the teachings of Christ. This is nothing but a low blow by the Iranian President.

Why does the media overlook Ahmadinejad's opinions of 9-11? Why don't you use these statements to demonize him further? Everyone loves to point out how the Iranian president wants to wipe Israel off the face of the world. You guys do a great job of making him seem unbalanced. I'm positive you could spin his views on 9-11 to show how out-of-touch with reality he is. I mean, the government covering up evidence surrounding Sept 11? Come on! That's ludicrous.

We wish that the USA would get out of Iraq completely and start to mind their own business. Bush has no repect around the world and in fact we feel strongly that he should be impeached for the terrible carnage in the middle east caused by his lies. What is wrong with the media? You certainly went after Nixon for crimes far less important! Bush is a lunatic and if he goes after Iran - God help us all!

What Ahmedinejad did was in conformity with the Islamic principles of dialogue and understanding. What need to be done from US is to respond positively instead of just brushing it aside. You may call it a diplomatic overture but it made me recall the letter written by Imam Khomeni to USSR President Gorbachev. The international obligations which US and EU claim to upheld clearly upheld the right of Uranium Enrichment for all member states as inalienable. Likewise it clearly stipulates that nuclear activities shouldnt bew diverted to military purposes. This clearly provide the necessary foundation for any dialogue based on equality and honor otherwise every nation has the right and should be ready to secure his honour and dignity.

How can the US just forgive the taken of the US Embassy, chanting death to America everyday as if they wher praying to their god, burning US flags in disrespect and hatred, number 1 in human right crimes. And the whole world believes they want PEACE. who belive them,let face the reality why are those nations like russia and china compromise for $$ convenience and not for MORALITY.

Its true the world will never get the entire truth of what the letter contains. It is also true that Iran is surely looking to produce nuclear weapons and the United States is looking to attack Iran. This said, anyone who has followed the history of the Middle East and has any knowledge of the two major religions knows that this is the beginning of the end.

Nice paper on related topic: http://zfacts.com/p/276.html

It appears to me as somebody from "New York Times" has written this letter.

Very interesting letter; and the media haven't mentioned all the main issues the Iranian president talked about. Such as; the occupation of Palestine (by Israel). And how the Palestinians are being killed everyday and their land is being taken away from them with the support of the Western countries ... plus what about the invasion of Iraq & WMD
.... what a shame ... the reporters are not doing their job!!!

It appears to me as somebody from "New York Times" has written this letter.

The press keeps voting for Ahmadinejah for American Idol. He could probably write a letter telling them to squeak like a pig, and they would do it.

How patently stupid to simply dismiss this letter without making any effort to follow up and see where it may lead. Not surprising for the war mongers in the Bush administration, but just one more opportunity we are giving the rest of the world, particularly Arab countries, to not see this as another "Iraq scenario". Recall that Iraq did everything the UN asked of them vis a vis weapons inspections and yet we ignored that. Why? Because Bush had already made the decision to go to war. So, real smart Mr. Bush. Let's not call their bluff, if it is one. Let's just ingore it and set things up so you'll have another pretext to start yet another pointless futile war, kill more American soldiers and make Bin Laden an even bigger hero to those who hate us than he already is.

Having read the entire text of the letter and various reactions too it, notably that of Condeleeza Rice, I am somewhat amazed at Americans. The level of hypocrisy it takes for the citizens of a so-called democracy(despite serious questions of fraud re the last two presidential elections) to demand that a independent nation state cease entirely legal(Iran has yet to breach a single rule of the Non-Priliferation treat that the USA refuses to sign)uranium enrichment. The USA has not only nuclear weapons but is expanding its nuclear energy industry. Of the two nations, only the USA has unilaterally invaded another country, occupied it and vetoed numerous UN resolutions denouncing human rights and land abuses in Israel/Palestine. I guess freedom, justice and respect are rights only Americans are entitled to.

Without exaggeration, Islamic Republic has to act in two scenes, Inside Iran they have to play every game to keep their opponents quite and showing the current standoff is more like a soccer game for people to watch. The second scene is Muslims' Worlds that have not had a hero for long time.Islamic Republic tries every play to give this impression to Islamic World.

For Iranians who have seen enough of this regime in past twenty-seven years, there is only one way is to look for democracy and regime change. West and EU in particular in past twenty-five years ignored desire and need of Iranians by dealing sweetly with Islamic Republic, Now if and only if West and modern democracy interested to defend their social values, the choice will be helping Iranians to achieve their goal of establishing democracy and justice.

There is no doubt that Islamic Republic will play every trick -old and new- to hide what they have done in past twenty-seven years to any freedom voice and try to make them counted as just politicians like all others. Nothing is more valuable for Islamic Republic to be viewed as legitimate government and with crisis in Iraq, they feel they have the wining cards forever. But Iran Needs Democracy NOT Atomic Mullahs, this is a fact that does not go away.

Tell the Kurds that Iraq had no WMD's.

How the Iranians, who experianced the same could deny their own suffering (understandable if the Iraqi Air force sent to Iran were carying the weapons -obvious self intrest).

It is hard to give Iran credibility toward working with anyone toward peace when they continue their support of terror, denial of Israel and illegal persuit (in contradiction to a treaty they signed) of Nukes.

The U.S. has been responsible for the spread of freedom to repressed peoples throughout the world. We feed, cloth and build the infastructure for these people. If Iran wants to talk as equal, let them start to do similar works. Let them shut down terrorist camps in their territory. Let them feed the and pay the $1 billion dollars for the PLO next year, then we can start to talk.

I see a lot of idealistic opinions posted here, but none dealing with the reality of the world and the real political drive of all nations... money. Ahmadinejad's is no dummy. The longer this game is played out in the media, the longer the high price of crude oil can be maintained. I am no fan of war or the death of innocents, but let's face reality. Wars have been fought in the past and will continue to be fought in the future over energy. Remember WWI, the conversion from coal to oil as a standard energy source?

It is hardly a low blow, as one person commented, to point out that the teachings of Jesus Christ are difficult - if not impossible - to reconcile with the policies of the Bush administration. It is simply something some do not want to hear because of its uncomfortable closeness to the truth. You can kill people and I suppose sometimes it is unavoidable. But you cannot do so and at the same time claim to follow Christ. You just can't have it both ways.

Hmm for 30 years they've flouted International Law (taking diplomats hostage do they think we just forgot about that?), encouraged civilian casualties, financed and supported civil unrest in Iraq, denied others the right to a country & now after threatening to virtually start WW3 they want to talk? Tell'em to go talk to France.

by PLO u actually mean Palestinian Authority

VERY INTERESTING. I COMMEND YOU FOR MAKING THIS LETTER AVAILBLE. THE WORLD NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND THE TRUTH OF DIVINE REVELATION IF WE WILL SAVE OURSELVES FROM DESTRUCTION. IF INTERESTED IN AN INTELLECTUAL STUDY OF DIVINE REVELATION PLEASE GO TO WWW.GODRELIGION.COM. The Koran states that the prophet Muhammad is mentioned in the Torah & the Gospel (Koran 7:157). The author studies this Koranic claim in the first part of this book starting with Ishmael, father of the Arabs, whose Hebrew name means "God Hears". Rabbi Glenn Blank (http://www.beitsimcha.com/s_ser/s_ser_0012.asp)affirms translating Ishmael from the Hebrew as "God Hears". Ishmael's descendents were promised a "Great Nation" (Bible, Genesis 17:20, KJV). In fulfillment of this promise Kedar and Tema (Genesis 25:13-15),who are the sons of Ishmael, are mentioned further in the Old Testament's Book of Isaiah as part of Isaiah's prophetic vision (Isaiah 21:11-17 and Isaiah 42:1-11).

Hmm for 30 years they've flouted International Law (taking diplomats hostage do they think we just forgot about that?), encouraged civilian casualties, financed and supported civil unrest in Iraq, denied others the right to a country & now after threatening to virtually start WW3 they want to talk? Tell'em to go talk to France.

Israel has nuclear weapons, why don't we inspect them? They're only 6 million strong, Iran is 68 million. Is this all really about the last of the worlds oil, located curiosly enough, in the Caspian Sea?

PA is now back to PLO as they have rejected all the tennants (acceptance of the right of Israel to exist, the rejection of terror as a means to a political end, etc) that made the PA a legitimate representative body for the Palestinians (lest you think I'm too harsh, I didn't call them Trans-Jordanians, as Palestine was a British territory never a country)

hello? did anyone read to the end of the letter where it says "liberalism and western style democracy have not been able to help realize the ideals of humanity. today these two concepts have failed... we increasingly see that people around the world are flocking towards a main focal point -- that is the Almighty God. Undoubtedly through faith in God and the teachings of the prophets, the people will conquer their problems." as history has shown, it's going to take a little more than faith to solve the world's problems.

the government covering up evidence is not ludicrous and the iranian presidents suggestion quite rings true. Watch this american made movie:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848&pl=true

Conclusion from the letter and the several responses here:

Ahmedinejad has registered a very meek blow on the US.

George Bush is a jerk.

Ahmedinejad is the favorite for Press all over the world.

US will attack Iran sooner or later.

Ahmedinejad is here to destroy Iran alongwith the US. Oh, dont forget that he will take out Israel as well !

If it were just about Oil the US would have kept Kuwait. In the last 100years what country has the US taken over and not returned to their people and lifted up into freedom, Japan, Germany?

We bring freedom and oportunity, I just hope the Iraqi people are luckey enough to continue to recieve the backing of the US till they can stand themselves in freedom.

I wish we had a president that could write such lengthy and thought inspiring letters.

I still think this Amadi dude is a nut; but its a sad day when the US is once again shown to have such a looser of a president.

I guess babyboomers in other parts of the world aren't as pathetic, apathetic, and useless as the ones we've got here.

mr bush invites mr ahmadinejad to camp david. they talk for few days.
within couple months, these are the results. 1)oil prices go down by $10
2)stability in iraq increases and american
boys go home 3)arab and gews live happily
4)us deficit goes down 5)everybody is happy except arm producers and big oil companies.
why not

There are many interesting excerpts in the letter, but the second quoted paragraph below is being completed ignored in the Western and Israeli press (even in Ha'aretz's long excerpt at http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/714066.html and the long Reuters excerpt at http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?xfile=data/theworld/2006/May/theworld_May287.xml§ion=theworld ) :

Is support for [the Israeli] regime in
line with the teachings of Jesus Christ
(Peace Be Upon Him) or Moses (Peace Be
Upon Him) or liberal values?

Or are we to understand that allowing
the original inhabitants of these
lands - inside and outside Palestine
- whether they are Christian, Muslim
or Jew, to determine their fate, runs
contrary to principles of democracy,
human rights and the teachings of
prophets? If not, why is there so
much opposition to a referendum?

This referendum of all interested parties solution to the conflict was also made in his April 2006 speech, and is a refinement of his wrongly-translated October 2005 speech (in which he called for the elimination of the "occupation regime", not the destruction of Israel as is repeatedly and falsely repeated).

Give peace a chance! Gush Shalom also seeks this solution.

Far from being the solution to all the world's problems, as the letter claims, religion is actually to blame for a lot of the world's problems, in particular the problems of the Middle-East.

Can we arrest Bush and turn him over to the Iranians?

You can tell who has read the letter and who has not. For anyone who graduate high school to see this as an overture is insane. Odd how Ahmadinejah and his version of Islam explain building hit by planes, pizzeria's with suicide bombers, embassies with truckbombs, and all the other killing done in its name. But, oh wait, it has all been a frame job by Christians and Americans and Jews. And the ridiculous excuse for an international media believes this, and the WaPo actually goes along. What is that sound? Circulaton dropping.

Without a doubt, the letter is demagogical and filled with unbelievable naiveté. However, it does reflect several very alarming trends and one of them is the fact that the U.S. no longer enjoys moral superiority in its dialogue with the international community. It is very much regretful that people like the commentator Karen, who posted her comment at 03:05 PM today, fail to see this. For people like that are blinded by the light of self-righteousness. Apart from being an unusual diplomatic maneuver, Ahamdinejad's letter certainly expresses (however awkward) the feelings of the people in the region.

Why don't we respond to the letter? And, while we are at it, let's open an embassy in Iran so we can have better diplomatice ties? Good idea eh? How we all forget!

The letter is clearly a message for us Americans to take a look at our selves for a minute and reflect on where we are going with our policies.

Iran on the other hand has to do more than just creative writing to convince the international community of their peaceful intentions that they are trying to convey.

Mr. Amadi-Nejad gets an 'A' in persuasion and proselytizing. Not uncoincidentally, he gets an 'F' in logic, historical accuracy, understanding of another's faith and viewpoint, and religious tolerance. Like pyramid scheme profiteers -- today's most advanced form of the evangelical nutcase -- Amadi-Nejad appears reasonable without using reason, salutes clarity while seeding confusion, emulates one seeking truth while excoriating many true seekers.

To understand Mr. Amadi-Nejad's core statements, one must not need to read between the lines. One must simply understand them from the point of view of Islam. Three snippets from his writing will help here: "There is no God, but Allah." "All events are determined by him." "Serve Him" -- the ultimate credo of Islam -- to be Meek like Moses, Obediant like Muhammad. Mr. Amadi-Nejad would like us to believe that he, the good Muslim, is but an agent of Good, that he serves God, and therefore serves his people. He sees that Mr. Bush too would like the world to believe this about himself (Mr. Bush). And in that miniscule kernel of commonality, Mr. Amadi-Nejad proports that the two work hand-in-hand toward the inevitable, of bringing all peoples in the world, including Mr. Bush, into the servitude of Allah, and that this will happen anyway, because it is God's will.

But all his rhetoric about "Liberalism" and "Western values", about the anger of the people toward "corruption", toward "the increasing gap" between rich and poor, the cause for human rights, the beatitudes of Jesus, this is all basic Rhetoric 101 -- use your opponent's rhetoric against him. The problem is, of course, is that this is neither Mr. Bush's rhetoric. Nor does Mr. Bush's faith admonish Mr. Amadi-Nejad's notion of "peace". Just because Jesus forgives and tells his followers to turn the other cheek doesn't mean a President must wait until anti-capitalists have nuked his country.

One must conclude that Mr. Amadi-Nejad is an idiot of first class.

Of course, one might also suspect, or even conclude, that Mr. Amadi-Nejad did not write his letter to convert Mr. Bush, but to obliquely address the leaders of Liberal Europe, to show what a man of courage and wisdom and peace he is. After all, it's incredulous not to think that Mr. Amadi-Nejad believes Mr. Bush to be a monotheist, as all Muslims know Christians are polytheists for believing in three gods. And as a religious studies teacher, he would know that Mr. Bush's "evangelical fundamentalism" is more about following the teachings of Paul than of Jesus. As his country's economic leader, he understands that in a free market, the gap between the rich and the poor is growing not because the poor are getting poorer, but because everyone is getting richer at different rates. And as a scientific director, of course he realizes that millions spent on an R&D program like nuclear power would have been better spent on building houses to withstand earthquakes that kill 30,000 of his own people. Twice. As a great teacher of history, surely he knows that Israel became a nation through developments at the end of World War I via British (mis-)diplomacy, and not as some kind of European guilty payback scheme for Hitler's crimes. And as a leader of the Arab world, surely he knows that the "indigenous people" of Palestine were hardly indigenous and hardly numbered in the millions and were in fact thought of by the Arabs as their nations' collective excrement. Certainly he is also aware that Israel's "political pressure" amounts to not giving Palestinians the money Israel taxes their own people and amounts to a long-standing policy of not dealing with terrorist organizations. And presumably he was not in the UN the day they condemned (sans veto) Israel's wall-building efforts. And HOPEFULLY -- maybe, just maybe -- he understands that if the US would attack Iraq on the *presumption* of secret WMD's, then how much greater the possibility the US would attack on his own country's open and defiant proliferation of them!

If that is the case, then, Mr. Amadi-Nejad's denial of history and abuse of logic is simply a clever vail of the ignorant country-Muslim-pumpkin who doesn't know what toilet paper is good for, when in fact he knows what it's good for and is trying to get you to show him how to use it so he can demonstrate to YOU why you should not eat with your left hand.

C.S. Lewis used a clever but illogical trilemma to persuade the unbeliever that Christ was Lord. "Lunatic, Liar, or Lord", he said, were the only viable options. I always chose "(d) Unwitting pawn in a game of political-religious idiology gone awry". I chose the same answer for Mr. Amadi-Nejad.

I hope I'm not alone on this one.

To me, seeing the Madman of Iran posturing his position with almost direct quotes from the liberal US rags, means only one thing: how truly isolated he really is already. Only the idiots who trust the biased reporting from the liberal mainstream media will take anything this Madman says seriously at all. It is more than just plain wrong for the WP to portray this Madman as anything other than the murderous supporter of terrorism that he is. Jeffeson Morley is welcome by me now to go live with the Madman, for his kind are unwanted here, where murderous madmen go to prison/asylums. Of course 30-40 years of using poppy derivatives casually makes the conscience clear. I'll bet Jefferson would want him in treatment.

Ahmadinejad's letter is a good way to indemnify himself and avoid the fate the Saddam Hussein suffered. If the Bush administration attempts to frame him through lies and deceit the way they framed Hussein, Ahmadinejad has it on record that he's tried to seek the peace. I doubt the Bush administration really wants peace anyway--it seems to me they're just looking for another trumped-up excuse to drop some more bombs on another Middle Eastern country.

You can tell who has read the letter and who has not. For anyone who graduate high school to not see this as an overture is insane. Odd how Bush and his version of Christianity explain torturing captives, unilaterally invading sovereign nations, lieing to the public, and all the other killing done in its name. But, oh wait, it has all been a frame job by Democrats and the French and the Germans. And the ridiculous excuse for an international media believes this, and the Washington Times actually goes along. What is that sound? Everyone's IQ levels dropping.

First, anyone who really believes that this letter was written by the New York Times does not read the New York Times or is in need of medication that helps to promote living in the real world. This might be a letter that Castro might have written if he'd suddenly discovered religion. It is not a polished letter. It comes off like stream of thoughts. It's factual, but it rambles and the point the author is trying to make is not clear. I would strongly suggest that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wrote it.

Second, this letter is a negotiating ploy, but the strategy for sending this letter to Bush is not apparent from the prose. The letter provides a sense that the maybe author is asking from Bush two things: 1) why are you persecuting Iran and 2) why are you setting Iran up in the same way that you set-up Iraq? So, I can say why he did it, he just did it.

Finally, I think the effect of the letter in the world community has surprised the author. More than anything, I think it's that some one has made a gesture, and that gesture came from Iran, not the US. And that gesture was not in the form of "bring 'em on," but reflective, seemingly thoughtful, and not overtly hostile. That really caught the Bush Administration by surprise. And (Not so bright) Rice immediately was dismissive. That - was fundamentally stupid. Any seasoned diplomat will tell you that a reflexive, back-handed dismissal to a gesture such as the Iranian letter is a stupid move. This is particularly true if you're not at war with them. You look for the positives first, otherwise, in the eyes of other nations, you appear like you are at war with them already or are trying to start one.

On this one, the Iranian gesture triggered the back-handed rejection and makes the US look boorish and militant. That's not what you want and Rice should have known that. Move evidence of incompetence.

The Irani president cites as an example of US imperialism the 1953 American CIA led coup d'etat which removed Mohammed Mosadegh, the duly elected leader of Iran. What's Achmedinijhad complaining about? Without the coup and the American installation of the corrupt and dictatorial Shah Pavlavi there would have been no Islamic Revolution and he and the mullahs wouldn't be in power today. Besides Bush eliminated their enemy (according to Bush their "evil axis" partner) Saddam Hussein. Achmedinijihad should build a shrine to Bush. No one on earth has done more to increase the power of the anti-Western Islamists in Iran.

To the Otheus, Karen and their ilk: If you operate on the assumption that "President should not wait until anti-capitalists have nuked his country," you are fatally misguided and your warped vision of the grand strategy for victory will lead you only to peril. As if Iraqi experience was not enough, the warmongers here do not fully realize the consequences that the U.S. invasion of Iran will have on a regional and global scale. Wake up you people and stop blaming everything on the liberal media, Democrats and France! Washington Post does superb job and Pulitzer Prizes is one measure of its success. This newspaper features nationally syndicated conservative columnists, including Krauthammer. Has anyone ever seen an op-ed by a liberal progressive in Washington Times? Think about it, who is more even-handed?

Between G. W. Bush and Iran's president, I have to say I find the Iranian president more credible and honourable. You may not agree with his beliefs but at least he didn't lie his way into a war that has taken tens of thousands of lives.

A solution for the current crisis over Iran's nuclear program

by
Cyrus Mossaddegh

We are at a point in history where the Iranian nuclear crisis could take many different directions. The two options most talked about are crippling sanctions that everybody knows will not work and precision military attacks by America and/or Israel that will most likely escalate into a far wider conflict. Both contain the strong possibility of causing major disruption to the world economy and may even result in the eventual use of nuclear weapons.

What if Iran agrees to dismantle its nuclear industry, would that not be the best solution? Of course many juicy carrots would have to be offered to the Iranians if they were to be persuaded to end their nuclear ambitions.

Below is a scenario much preferable to the two options above, assuming world leaders have the creativity and courage to make it happen.

Iran agrees to totally dismantle its nuclear industry and not pursue nuclear technology in return for the following incentives and agreements:

American agrees to withdraw all its forces from Iraq and Afghanistan,

America closes down all its military bases in Central Asia,

America withdraws all its naval forces from the Persian Gulf and Sea of Oman and closes down all its military bases in the Middle East,

America enters into a favorable twenty-year agreement with OPEC for the supply of oil and natural gas to the United States, in return for stringent conservation programs to eliminate wastage throughout American industry and society, as well as a ten fold increase in the use of renewable energy,

America insists that Israel's nuclear arsenal be placed under the control of NATO by January 2007, or all aid will be cut off and crippling sanctions imposed,

America supports and assists Iran to join the World Trade Organization,

America removes all trade sanctions and signs a fair and favorable trading treaty with Iran,

America would publicly admit to the mistake of destroying Iranian democracy in 1953 by conducting a coup and installing a dictatorship and Iran in return would apologize for the taking of the American Embassy hostages and would compensate them and their families in some way that would be acceptable,

America provides significant financial support to secure the Afghan side of the border so as to eliminate the smuggling of all drugs into Iran,

America returns all frozen Iranian assets in American banks, plus the interest generated over these past years,

America agrees to support Iran's position on the division of the Caspian Sea boundaries,

America agrees to support Iran's ownership rights to the three islands in the Persian Gulf,

America agrees to the building and use of a crude oil pipeline between the Caspian Sea and the Persian Gulf,

America implements new U.S. tax incentives for Iranian-Americans so as to encourage investment in the Iranian economy,

America and Europe provide funding, technology transfer, and establishment of a solar and wind industry in Iran so that by 2015 fifty percent of Iran's energy is derived from alternative energy sources,

America provides assistance and funding in the establishment of an Iranian version of the Small Business Administration,

American and Europe assist in the establishment of a venture capital industry in Iran,

America in cooperation with France, Germany, England, and Australia fund and establish a hundred universities in Iran by 2010 with focus on the following fields: business management, finance and economics, medicine, agriculture, sciences and engineering, computer sciences, transportation, international trade, communication, comparative religion and peace studies,

America and Europe support the entry of Hezbollah as a political party into the Lebanese democratic process after it has disarmed,

America and Europe enforce the favorable settlement of Iran's war claims from the Iran-Iraq war,

America agrees to fund strategic alliances and joint ventures between Silicon Valley and Iranian companies,

America and Europe help modernize and expand Iran's capital markets,

America and Europe return all historical items discovered in Iran, and which are now in museums around the world,

America and Europe would agree to abide by and enforce the implementation of stringent environmental laws for the Caspian Sea as a condition for further oil and gas exploration and development,

America and Europe would cooperate in the establishment of a Middle Eastern alliance similar to NATO, which would renounce and ban the deployment, or use of, all weapons of mass destruction.

One of the first steps if the above was to be implemented would be the immediate establishment of a hot line between Tehran and Washington to make sure no unforeseen or unauthorized confrontation takes place between American and Iranian forces. This would require the public acknowledgement that some extremist in both countries do not want the re-establishment of good relations but would prefer military confrontation.

Finally if all of the above is agreed to Iran agrees to implement and enforce the democratic process on all levels of Iranian society and dismantle any governing offices headed by non-elected individuals. Iran would also recognize the right of Israel to exist, and end all its support for non-Iranian resistance groups like Islamic Jahid, Hamas, and Hezbollah.

So, which is the better option, sanctions that could trigger world-wide economic depression, military confrontation that could quickly escalate into a regional war, or abandoning nuclear activity and imperialism in exchange for peace?

After reading the entire text, it is my opinion that the contents of this letter bear much relevance to the current affairs in the middle east, and pose many well-aimed questions (read rhetoric) that cannot be answered with ease on the part of Mr. Bush.

Yet, in my opinion the contents are irrelevant. What matters is that Mr. Ahmedinejad has reached out to Mr. Bush in a reconciliatory way, which put Mr. Bush in a difficult position where he must either (a) choose to act as he did when dealing with Saddam, i.e. disregard any opportunity to resolve the conflict through peaceful means and go ahead with the pre-decided war (which the US cannot afford), or (b) play along and risk providing Iran with ample time for crossing the threshold of invincibility. Tough call, eh?

Nevertheless, Mr. Ahmedinejad plays on Mr. Bush's notoriety as a warmonger and he does it in a smart way. I can understand where some of the folks, who have stated their scepticism above, are coming from, yet they are well advised to remember that the US cannot afford another war with an adversary as substantive as Iran, neither financially nor diplomatically, since Mr. Bush has unwisely used up all the credit he, and the US, had.

In fact, Mr. Ahmedinejad takes up the role of peacemaker (don't laugh :) ) against Mr. Bush, who is perceived to be a notorious warmonger. With a little more help from Mr. Cheney, Iran may even have Russians on its side on the UNSC, who are actually quite ready to jump on the US wagon, provided that they are granted more concessions (as if a war in Iran is not profitable enough for them [read energy prices, weakened US power and influence, shattered Western economies]).

Nevertheless, diplomacy is not the greatest strength of this administration, so I'm guessing Mr. Bush shall not fail his admirers and indulge the path of war (if he is able) yet he'll have a very difficult time in putting together a true "coalition" in imposing sanctions, let alone in waging war, against Iran.

PS. I wonder what Mr.Francis "The End of History" Fukuyama's take is on all this? Or has he given up talking above his head already? :)))))))

Cyrus, are you stoned or something? Do you think anyone is going to take the time to read the contents of that long ass, pointless comment outlining some hypothetical agreement that is never going to take place. So you're what: a sophomore in college now? Essays like this from people with nothing better to do take away from the value, if there is any, in a comments section like this. Also to many posters have an attitude suggesting that they think they know everything there is to know about every subject there is. Please take it down a notch people: most of the people posting here shouldn't be qualified to think for themselves, much less others.

Read full text of the letter here: http://www.irna.ir/en/news/view/line-24/0605094639235358.htm

The American self-haters are at it again. Some actually respect the Iranian president. explain that to your children. I know most of you are Canadians, or wannabees, and if you think anyone wants war you are even more Canadian, especially those of us with family members in the military. I would be very happy with giving Iran reactors, paid for by the American people, for civilian use only. But to say that it is a good opinion that Islamic jihadist have been murdering westerners and Americans for decades and we should go their way because of an 17 page letter is nuts!!!! You can blame it on Bush if it makes you feel better, but the slaughter started happening 3 decades ago and has not stopped. If you think their reaction to Rushdie and the comics is how you want to live, go right ahead. But to not be aware that going along with the way they think is akin to going along with Nazi because "that is how people feel in that area" or the KKK because it was popular and supported by some stupid ideal. Bush haters need to put that aside and decide if Ahmadinejah is not planning the demise of the western world.

What dispensation of pearls of wisdom should one expect from commentators who think that selective revisionism of the modern history is a reliable line of argumentation. Have you forgotten Pakistan's acquisition of nuclear weapons? Did Islamabad launch nukes on Tel Aviv? Did Pakistan and India initiate nuclear exchange over Kashmir? Look at what's happening there now. Osama is frolicking in the northwest frontier province, which is teeming with both Al Qaeda and Taliban sympathizers. And what does the administration do about it? Nothing. To Karen and the like: it is far too easy to label someone with convenient cliches such as "American self-haters," but it is much more difficult to conceptualize a proper response to the 68-million strong country with vast oil and gas reserves bent on acquiring a full nuclear cycle technology and possibly more.

TruthHurtz said: "The U.S. has been responsible for the spread of freedom to repressed peoples throughout the world. We feed, cloth and build the infastructure for these people. If Iran wants to talk as equal, let them start to do similar works."

Here's a little-known fact that your media has never reported to you:

In 2002, after the invasion of Afghanistan, an international donors' conference was held in Tokyo at which governments offered funds to help rebuild that country.

The leading donor of Afghan reconstruction funds was....Iran.

Iran gave $560 million.

Second was Japan, with $500 million.

Third was the EU, with $450 million.

Fourth was the US, with $297 million.

Don't believe me? Here's the proof, in one of your own government's documents:
http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/9662.pdf

Scroll down to page 8, Table 1: Pledges from the Tokyo Reconstruction Conference.

Well, well.

Surprise, surprise.

I wonder why you never heard about this.

Owing to the close proximity of the Palestinians, Syria, and other Islamic states, I doubt if Iran would use a Nuclear Weapons against Israel IF they had one.
Further the chance of any conventional war between them is virtually nil because they would have to go through the Arab Middle East to fight a war. As non-Arabs, it would not be a good idea for either one of them to cross Arab territory.
In a recent issue of Ha'artz, the Israeli Paper, Israeli intelligence reported that Syria was concentrating on developing infantry tactics as a defensive measures as opposed to tanks as an offensive weapons. It was felt that Israel could save some money on offensive weapons too.
I think Bush is more interested in limiting Iranian support for Hamas and the Palestinians. This nuclear bit has to be a ploy, because Middle Eastern countries live too close together to use them without commiting suicide.
Terrorism/fighters are the more likely mode of conflict for the forseeable future.

Three thoughts:
The West tried divine rule already. It reached it's pinacle during the Spanish Inquisition. No thanks. The problem always seems to be that we need a tangible human being or beings to convey devine will, and the communication link is never transparent to the rest of us and thus always suspect. Of course God is alway right, by definition, so if there are opposing viewpoints as to what God wants, there's no room for compromise. Tried it; doesn't work. It will be a blessing when everyone realizes this.

Ahmadi-Nejad's claims to be a man of his people would be more convincing if the mullah-tocracy who are really in charge had not disqualified every viable liberal alternative candidate.

If the fact that Israel has not always existed is an argument against its current legitimacy (as President Ahmadi-Nejad insinuates), there are a lot of other nations in their neighborhood that suffer from the same embarrassment.

Ahmedinejad's letter does not exactly establish any common ground or propose points for negotiation. Jeferson Morley quotes a former State Department official, Mark Fitzpatrick, calling the letter an "astute negotiating ploy." But I see no proposal to negotiate, only a lot of rhetoric and fulminations. Imagine sitting across a table from a person who vilifies you and rambles on and on with obscure scriptural allusions.

However, Ahmedinejad may not be half so mad as his letter's addressee. Who but the US was so crazy as to think it could occupy and rebuild Iraq?

Furthermore, Ahmedinejad recites lots of anti-US sentiments which, if we can believe polls, have perhaps 80% adherence in the Mideast and maybe 40% to 60% adherence in West Europe, much of Asia, and South America. Even a fair share of Blair's party might concur with some of the Iranian's assertions.

China and the rest of the world sit pretty, smirking, as we swagger about and look for more costly quagmires to sink into--alone.

Time to get smart. Let's re-read Washington's Farewell Address and G. Kennan's long telegram. Containment, deterrence, and restrained self-interest make a lot more sense than to think you can recreate the world in your image.

Maybe W should reply to Ahmedinejad's letter with a an invitation to join him for an Astros game, chat about sports, sip some lemonade, and breeze at length about whatever he pleases. The gesture would achieve great results, even if the talk were all gobbledygook.

Is the western media so deranged that they interpret Mahmoud's rant as anything other than a delaying tactic.

YOU IDIOTS THIS IS WHAT THEY DO! Trample agreements then say, "Hey but we're willing to talk about it some more." Then while you're all talking (and grateful to do so) they're making weapons.

Here it is, dummies:
1. Iran wants a nuclear device.
2. They plan to use it.
3. They've said as much.
4. You're too dumb to live if you think words can always substitute for deeds.

The question one ought to be asking is: Who is representing this letter as an honest attempt at dialogue and why? If it is meant to be conciliatory (given the prospect of imminent international condemnation in the UNSC), why is Ahmaninejad so critical of American policy, of the United Nations (for its role in the establishment of the state of Israel), and of Democracy, among other things? Why does he seek to re-visit myths long dispelled about 9/11? Why does he seem to want to deflect attention onto Israel, a US ally that has demonstrated responsible nuclear ownership, when he is the one who clearly flaunts the NPT and pursues ambitions of developing nuclear weapons, not simply nuclear power. Why does he scrupulously avoid looking in the mirror at his own country's actions and policies, some of which are less than exemplary? As long as he is quoting Jesus, remember this one? "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
If Iran is serious about being taken seriously, it should do better, and the international community ought not apply a lower standard.

TJ,

I mostly agree with you, yet in my opinion the letter is far more instrumental than a delaying tactic. It's also aimed at making it harder for the US to put together a meaningful coalition. So, in a sense, it's a disarming move, too.

In regards to your point #4: If we are to credit deeds over words, mind you, Iran does not have a bad record in terms of "deeds." (Compare this to consistency of Mr. Bush's words and actions). If interested, you might want to look up in history to see when it was the last time Iran waged a war of agression (hint: you might need to go as far back as 16th century. Here's a link: http://www.parstimes.com/Iran_history.html ). So, if prior deeds are a measure of future behavior, in my opinion there's no reason to expect that Iran would use a nuclear weapon (if they manage to acquire one, as I'm sure they intend to do so) to attack another state, except in self defense.

These folks have been around since the times of Alexander the Great (which is indicative of having to a certain extent the "live and let live" philosophy, somewhat), so I'd figure they are not as insane as many comments here suggest.

Sophomoric, a would-be charismatic employing alternating currents both whining and accusatory. An uncomfortable attempt made by someone who is used to bullying and bluster at "civilized" discourse; however the letter's "high minded" attempts contain the same messages that have been continually delivered by this leader in more dictatorial tones: Iraq wants unlimited access to nuclear technology and research, and they want Israel blown to gehenna. No amount of wheedling or posturing changes the bottom line: Iraq is still an unstable place.

A) Iran will not wipe Israel off the map. Iran is now surrounded. They know it. They finally realize that our long term goal is them. Not for oil. The lead up to war has caused the Iranian neighbors to swell in wealth, but we nor they need Iranian oil. (psst - Russia and China do)

B) Iran will not have nukes, that IS reason B why they are surrounded. The long term goal in place by the USA has been and is Iran. Bye, Bye, "mullahs".

This course of events is not coincidental.

Hey, TJ, since we're all "dummies" and you're so smart, can you help me out?

I'd really like to see a link giving the Iranian govts' comments that you mention, where they say:

"1. Iran wants a nuclear device.
2. They plan to use it.
3. They've said as much."

I haven't heard Iran saying it plans to build and use a nuclear device, but then I'm just a dummy.

So here's your chance to prove how smart you are - by backing up your claims with quotes and evidence (and links).

I won't hold my breath.

The reactions in the comments to this article illustrate the sad state of much of the world's understanding of the realities of the tensions between Islam and the rest of the world. Most responses fall into one of three camps: the unaware, the easily manipulated, and the angry self-haters. A few examples:

The Unaware
Dave Spratt at 3:06pm faults Bush for not reacting positively to what Mr Spratt apparently believes is a genuine entreaty to dialogue. Perhaps Mr Spratt should take a basic course in media politics.

tleggett at 3:09pm hopes Bush can put aside his "cowboy" attitude for a while. What cowboy attitude is that? Removing perhaps the most bloodthirsty dictator on earth? Attempting to win with and for Iraqis the blessings of self-determination?

Jose at 5:02pm says he finds Iran's 'president' (as if he were elected in an open, democratic process) more creditable that Mr Bush. Oh my goodness. Jose says, "at least he didn't lie his way into a war that has taken tens of thousands of lives." Jose, do you know how many of those lives have been taken by Iranian-supported terror factions in Iraq? By Iranian-funded terrorists in Israel and Palestinian territories? And how, exactly, did Mr Bush lie? About WMDs? See below.

The Easily Manipulated
duncan at 3:08pm says the letter makes a good case, such as the WMD issue. But wait, the majority of the world thought Iraq had WMDs; Hussein used them against the Kurds, and he feined cooperation with UN investigators while preventing actual progress well beyond any reasonable level of patience. Yet Bush, who gave Hussein every conceivable chance to cooperate or step down, is accused by the Islamic world and by uninformed people all over the world of lying about WMDs. Examine the facts, people. Bush didn't lie. Hussein lied, tortured, extorted, cheated, raped, murdered, gassed, . . . That's a good case, duncan???

Ted Hoffman at 3:18pm says the media should address Mr Ahmadinejad's claim that Israel is illegitimate. Mr Hoffman, can you name any other countries that were established by other states? No? How about Iraq? Is Iraq illegitimate? Was it before the toppling of Hussein?

Cyrus Mossaggegh at 5:06pm offers a lengthly plan for the US to unilaterally disarm in return for reducing current hostilities. Actually I feel for him; it's clearly heart-felt. But sir, all of those benefits are available to Iran today, if they merely cease to support terrorism, support nuclear non-proliferation, open their government to true democratic elections, and join the world community as a force for good. Were they to do so, all of the wonderful things you propose could happen. And America would not have to expose itself naked as a woman in a prison full of sex-starved rapists, counting on their goodwill in return. (OK, it might help if Iran renounced Islam as well -- since Islam requires the forced subjugation or murder of all non-Muslims).

The Angry Self-Haters
Stuart at 3:22pm says the Bush administration are war mongers, patently stupid, and that Iraq did everything the UN asked of them during weapons inspections. Ah - toppling the world's worst dictator makes Bush a war monger? Hussein cooperated on WMD? Stuart goes on to call the Iraq war futile and pointless. Gosh, to the contrary, bringing self-determination to Iraq and putting Al Queda on its heels (and it IS on its heels, which is what drives the desperate daily suicide bombings) is quite a point. Stuart: America, with the leadership of Mr. Bush, is trying to free the oppressed people of Iraq. Not pointless, my friend. Do you disagree?

James at 3:23 claims America is not a real democracy, and that Iran is being virtuous in its pursuit of an atomic bomb, which, if one were to read the Koran, one would know that Iran will immediately deploy it against Israel and America, and other dhimmis. My goodness, James, I hope you don't sell cars.

As usual the geniuses in the Bush Administration have been outmanouvered. They threatened Iran with "all options are on the table" and having failed to gain any support domestically or abroad, are now furiously backpeddling. The "Bring em on" president now says that ""The first choice and a choice that I think will work with the Iranians is diplomacy,...And I believe we can accomplish this through diplomacy." http://voanews.com/english/2006-05-09-voa59.cfm

The tragedy is that Iran needs to be contained. However this president has expended all his political capital at home and abroad.

Who from this administration can make a case to the American people than we must use force? Bush? Cheney? Rumsfeld? Rice? Hardly.

The Iranians know it and will exploit it.

Iran Has not attacked another country in more than 200 years. Although they talk tough about israel, so does every body else in the region, including our allies the Pakistanis, who already have nukes and are responsible for giving nuclear weapons technology to Iran and North Korea and who are in a bitter land dispute with our other nuclear allies, India. Furthermore, each time Iran's President says something threatening about Israel, the price of Irans most valuable export goes up! I am not surpised that he continues to do it. In fact I would not be surprised if traders from the new york exchange don't call Irans president on a regular basis to ask him to expand on and re-explain his views on Israel in the most public forums possible.

Seriously though, consider our history with them. We installed a brutal dictator, they eventually tossed him out, we then arm Saddam with weapons of mass destruction which he uses on them during a war which causes massive casualties. Then when Saddam becomes a liability we take him out and occupy his country, and almost immediatly start making noises about bombing them to stop them from making power plants. I mean it pisses me off to see Rumsfeld Shaking hands with Saddam, but can you imagine how it makes them feel?

Yes, their president seems to be an anti Semetic jerk, but historically, he seems to have much better reasons to be afraid of us and Israel (who has 200 or so nukes and has gone to war with and occupied many of it's neighboring countries) than we do of them.

Finally, it is a truly sad state of affairs for American Journalism when the best and most candid political interviewer
is in fact a man who only pretends to be a journalist. Colberts interview with William Cristol was both enlightening and hilarious. If more journalists asked more questions such as those asked by Colbert of Cristol, the news would be much funnier and we might not be in the mess we are in in the Middle east.

J

Earlier 'James" wrote:

Having read the entire text of the letter and various reactions too it, notably that of Condeleeza Rice, I am somewhat amazed at Americans. The level of hypocrisy it takes for the citizens of a so-called democracy(despite serious questions of fraud re the last two presidential elections) to demand that a independent nation state cease entirely legal(Iran has yet to breach a single rule of the Non-Priliferation treat that the USA refuses to sign)uranium enrichment. The USA has not only nuclear weapons but is expanding its nuclear energy industry. Of the two nations, only the USA has unilaterally invaded another country, occupied it and vetoed numerous UN resolutions denouncing human rights and land abuses in Israel/Palestine. I guess freedom, justice and respect are rights only Americans are entitled to.

in response to "despite serious questions of fraud re the last two presidential elections" - there were never any accusations of fraud made by any political party.

As far as his ridiculous statement "Iran has yet to breach a single rule of the Non-Priliferation treat that the USA refuses to sign" - the Iranians had a secret nuke program for a very long time, completely against the very treaty they had signed - man are you on poppy derivitives?

You wrote "Of the two nations, only the USA has unilaterally invaded another country, occupied it" - perhaps you are 12 years old and were not present when the coalition of the willing decided that governments who support terrorism need to be stopped? (or just an idiot?) Our fight against Terror will continue with our friends by our sides.

"and vetoed numerous UN resolutions denouncing human rights and land abuses in Israel/Palestine." - let's leave out how Israel has been repeatedly attacked by it's neighbors, minor point right?

BTW, your statement "I guess freedom, justice and respect are rights only Americans are entitled to.", is so far from an inteliigent statement.........I suggest you stop thinking right now and study much much more. The USA single handedly has done more for peace, freedonm, prosperity, and helped more other countries out than anyone ever.
The Mullahs of Iran have disqualified every legitimate person who did not agree with them in every so called election. Please read up on Democracy, Iran, the USA, and please, please, stay where you are.

The US and its gung-ho reps can keep barking all they want. It is the only thing they can do and everybody including Iran knows it. Everybody is exploiting the situation while Bush and company suffer from delusions of grandure.

OD:

"I haven't heard Iran saying it plans to build and use a nuclear device, but then I'm just a dummy."

You said it, not us. It's an astute self-assessment.

Everybody seems to have had their say, so this discussion is hereby closed.