Columbia University campus in New York City. They could have shied away from the controversy. They could have said, "We are part of the trauma that still exists in this city," but they didn't and they acted most admirably to open dialogue between the USA and Iran.
It is obvious the Iranian President feels as ease addressing students and university students at that, which perhaps allows greater openness to the American public than a formal address at the United Nations.
I think all the controversy is exceptionally good for both nations. For many reasons. The first obviously is the intense focus by the media in covering the Iranian President. The NYTimes has access to the address on the net and what could be better?
There are other reasons this openness is beneficial. I do believe much of what is being witnessed over the past several days both in Iran and the USA is a well orchestrated PR campaign to benefit elections in Iran. I think it's important in analyzing the events of Iran's president, at home, in NYC at Columbia and at the UN for sincerity and fact.
I found what he stated about his country being a victim of terrorism more than interesting. He is correct. The people the USA, as a nation, are assisting now in An Albar an element feared by Iranians and can easily be viewed as enemies of Iran. The people being armed in Iraq can be viewed by Iran as allies of the USA and feared for their potential to cause another conflict. It was the very Sunnis that are in An Albar that conducted the Iran-Iraq war. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is correct in his statements, in that, the manner in which the USA is progressing with it's increase in arms to the Iraqi Sunnis of An Albar is viewed as a hostile act by the Shi'ites of Iran. I have stated that over and over again and now it comes directly from the source.
I am not surprised, the Shi'ites of Iraq are attempting to secure their government away from the Sunnis and I am not surprised the Iraqi Constitution is calling for Provincial governments. The dynamics in Iraq will not uphold a central authority. There is much needed diplomacy between Iran and the USA in order to settle any misunderstandings between ALL parties with reassurances there won't be problems in the future that would result in war with the Sunnis.
I have repeatedly stated, this is a regional issue which has to be settled by the region. This is NOT a matter of applying USA priorities and policies. It is a far greater issue and the 'idea' that Iran is marginalized in it's aspirations to nuclear armament is more than appropriate, but, in stating that there needs to be reassurances there will be no further expansion of the Iraq War. Quite the contrary. If the USA wants Iran to 'back off' any assistance of the Shia in Iraq, that needs to be negotiated and not resolved with threats to war on Iranian soil.
I am convinced more than ever, much of what Mahmoud Ahmadinejad states about Israel and the Holocaust is nothing but playing to his politicial base. If anyone should understand that, it would be Bush and Conti Rice. You know, the Axis of Evil mess ! Was any moral American actually impressed by Bush's speech at the border with North Korea when he intentionally enflamed the 'reason for war' with North Korea, Iraq and Iran? I wasn't impressed. I thought Bush the most stupid President I ever heard speak to an International audience.
