Hillary's "Final Solution" to the Persian Problem
Counterpunch / ROBERT WEITZEL
16-May-2008 (16 comments)

There are over 70 million human beings living in Iran, 17.5 million of whom are under the age of fifteen. Hillary Clinton vowed to attack Iran and “totally obliterate” the majority of the Persian race in a furnace of primordial fire should the Iranian government attack Israel with nuclear weapons, which they do not now possess or are likely to for some time—if ever.

Hillary’s “final solution” to the Persian problem bests Adolf Hitler by a magnitude of ten.

Missing in Clinton’s campaign trail pandering to America’s pro-Israel lobbies and the mushrooming evangelical Christian Zionist movement is the “inconvenient truth” that Israel has the most modern and most deadly army in the Middle East thanks to an annual $3.5 billion in American aid—one third of the U.S. aid budget.

recommended by sadegh




by Anonymous21 (not verified) on

Obama is not leftee. But most of the progressive liberal leftees that hate United States support Obama. You are right, I don't know Obama, but does anyone know him? He has been one the most populist, opportunist, mediocre person that I have seen. Expanding globalization by rejecting NAFTA. Providing national security by talking to Hamas. And of course hocus pocus to porvide health insurance for every American. So far he has made non sense speeches for the hired crowd that cheers up even when he blows nose.


Hanna, I am now convinced that you are on drug….

by Anonymoush (not verified) on

Speaking irrelevant nonsense is either due to stupidity or being irrational under the influence. Who said Obama was a leftie? All I said was that if Obama is elected as president of the most militarily powerful nation on the face of the earth, then be prepared for Armageddon. Keep chewing the vomit of this imbecile and vote for him.

I am a realist and appreciate the possibility (and even very high likelihood) of Obama’s presidency. But, I warn you to be prepared for the next holocaust, because the world will not settle for Khomeini’s global Islamism, even if your idealist president pushes for it.

Hanna, you are so far off and irrelevant that, better let Sadegh or another intelligent soul do the talking.

One more time, the issue is not defending Hillary (which I think is the best of the worst), but rather to use what she said to promote the worst choice in the bunch….


Did someone intend to say that Obama is a lefty????

by hanna (not verified) on

If you are making a judgement that since some of us prefer Obama to Hillary we are lefties - then you don't know Obama! And just because he says he will not follow the same idiotic gun boat foreign policy of the Bush Admininstration to be followed by John McCain or the neoliberal hawk Clinton; does not make him a lefty!

Interesting how some of you even consider speaking to foreign governments to resolve disputes and conflicts as opposed to engaging in military actions as being lefty!

I guess we can then call you the most right winger, neoconservatives who are proponnets of prepetual wars!



by Anonymous21 (not verified) on

I 100% agree with you. Poeple that criticize Hilary over her statement about Iran are only looking for an excuse to praise that imbicile Obama. Obama is the one that just for the sake of winning this election is doing anything. Cheer up you progressive leftees. American Marshal Petain is on the way.


truth is bitter

by Arash Kamangir (not verified) on

The iranian Regime is undoubtedly one of the most radical and backward regime that the recent history has seen. This regime was brought to power mainly by iranian themselves through a unnecessary "revolution".
In the last 30 years the iranian has paid a dear price by keeping this regime. We all now slowly should realize that this can get worse and the "End" can come abruptly with millions of casualties. Let us not blame Clinton or Mccaine. Those to blame sit in Tehran and Qom.

Javid Shah


Smoking Pot or being drunk no - understanding wrong policy yes!

by hanna (not verified) on

The U.S. politicians with their unconditional support of Israel and in order to appease the powerful Israeli Lobby and gain Jewish vote are in fact doing greater harm for both the American citizens, American Jews and the Israelis (I am not speaking about the Israeli Gov.)!!

What the world needs is the art of true Statemanship as opposed to the art of war. She demonstrated that she is no statesman or stateswomen, nor does she understand foreign policy.... now you can go on trying to refute all of this.

Do you think Israelis like the fact that a known pro-Israeli pro AIPAC presidential candidate will state in front of the world that she has no calm to obliterate an entire people on behalf of Israel? Do Israelis need more enemies in the Arab and Muslim world; even if behind close doors they may have loved what she said?

Do U.S. foreign policy makers want to alienate the only people in the Middle East which despite the horrific American policy are more pro-American than any other people? Her statement did exactly this - it made Iranians hate her royally, including us right here in the West. So if this was her mission she managed to accomplish it pretty well!

Poor choice of words, abhorrent, unacceptable by any rational thinking!

Now keep on going and make excuses for Hillybilly; it is fuitile; you are not going to win the hearts and minds of Iranians no matter how much you attempt to rationalize this!

I like to ask you a question? Have you tried to explain the same rationality about Ahmadinejad's mis-tranlated statement about Israel? Have you tried to make a case that Ahmadinejad never meant he wanted to wipe Israel off the map, and was never threatening Israel or the Israeli people? I bet you not!!

Thanks for trying!


Hanna, you must be smoking pot or being drunk to totally miss th

by Anonymoush (not verified) on

Are you suggesting that if she had her usual response of:

" I refuse to respond to such hypothetical questions".

She would be a better candidate and not a war monger anymore? What an idiotic reasoning. Whether I support her or not is not the issue. And I don’t care how the media is slamming her for that language. But, to use that response as an argument to promote an impotent, out of touch with reality and sweet talker as president is a path to self destruction. Let me remind you again of this quote:

“To misunderstand the nature and threat of evil is to risk being blindsided by it . . . An evil unchecked is the prelude to genocide.”

And also for the record, Kennedy and Khrushchev met in Vienna in June of 1961. US was not on the brink of nuclear war. The Cuban Missile Crisis was 15 months in the future.

Keep on raising your fist and screaming “audacity of Hope”, “Change, we can believe in”, etc…

We shall see…..


Evil are those who have no shame in condoning, expressing

by Anonymous-2 (not verified) on

their readiness, and are committing genocide. In today's world there are currently two countries which fall into this category. Now why don't you give us your best shot who those two countries are? Hint - it ain't Iran! So move on to your next choice.


To: Anonymoush - you put your finger on exactly the right button

by hanna (not verified) on

You stated:

"Your nonsensical sensitivity to her use of a particular word in response to a hypothetical question is mind boggling."

The word is HYPOTHETICAL - exactly right

Now how has she responded to other hypothetical questions when commentators have asked her similar hypothetical questions?

" I refuse to respond to such hypothetical questions".

She has said this over and over again.

She should have responded in her typical same manner when asked about this very unlikely,highly remote and quite hypothetical question.

She knows better - Iran does not have nuclear weapons, nor the military capability that even comes close to Israel; nor is Iran about to commit national suicide. This was indeed a very foolish question and she provided a very foolish response.

Common don't keep giving Hillary excuses. Such a comment would be expected from the idiot Dubya, but not Hillary.

Even the American media has yet to stop speaking about how shocked they are at the usage of her language. No one has condoned her statement and those in her camp are trying to come up with the same excuses as you are.

One good news today; she is apparently not campaigning anymore. She is about to give up - thank GOD we may finally get rid of Hillary the powermonger.


Hold your horses… and answer the question….

by Anonymoush (not verified) on

Would it have made her a better candidate if she had said “ we would have an extremely harsh reaction”?
Your nonsensical sensitivity to her use of a particular word in response to a hypothetical question is mind boggling. People like Anonymous-2 take advantage of any opportunity to cut-and-paste the same slogans over and over in every post.

As far as sticking to the subject of this thread, let me point to those ignorant souls that see in an article only what they want to see, that this article started with the following quote:

“To misunderstand the nature and threat of evil is to risk being blindsided by it . . . An evil unchecked is the prelude to genocide.”

Dr. Mordechai: The Ezekiel Option

In my humble opinion IRI is the evil.

Nuff said…


Anaymoush, get help now!

by Anonymous-this (not verified) on

Anaymoush, you don't make sense. Who and what is Obama a traitor to? Look up the word in the dictionary. So we have to applaud a political opportunist like Hillary because she is honest in being a warmonger? Why not ask what would anyone do if Iran attacked Mars? these kind of "hypothetical" questions create a climate of fear and aggression. Even Ahamadinejad's rethtoric has never said we will attack Isreal. He has said that Isreal as a country doesn't make sense and should go. Ok, his remarks are also moronic and create an atmosphere of hatred but where is Iran's capabilities of attacking Isreal? Where are the nuclear weapons? What is the incentive to attack Isreal? Do you think Isreal even needs US's help to obliterate Iran? Read the article that this thread is about before putting your two cent in.


Even the statement that one will obliterate an entire nation is

by Anonymous-2 (not verified) on

shameful by anyone let alone by a presidential candiate running for the most powerful seat in the world.

I don't care whether she is pandering to the Israeli Lobby, Israel, the jews vote or demonstrating that she can be a greater warmonger than John McCain; such statements demonstrate that behind all the facade their exists individuals who will say and do anything including committing genocide for power, money and greed.

This is American Foreign policy - they have to kiss the ass of Israel for the U.S. President to get elected.

Didn't you all see how Bush took the podium of the Israeli Kenesset to take a swipe at U.S. presidential candidates, namely Obama? He obviously had no shame to compare Obama to Neville Chamberlain speaking to Hitler during Nazi Germany. How outrageous was this?

Has anybody ever seen the President of a country speaking at the Parliament of a foreign country and bash their own citizens, and policies? Guess who is picking the U.S. President, the Israeli Lobby, and Israel!!


would it have been any better

by Anonymoush (not verified) on

if she had said "She will react decisively and respond with extreme harshness" if IRI nuked Israel? And leave it for you to picture what she meant by "harsh"? She just came out and said what she means by "harsh". You can't just character assasinate someone for not being politically correct. At least you know where she stands.

To fall for some traitor like Obama is the ultimate tragedy. What do you think Obama would say to a hypothetical question "What would he do if Iran nuked Israel?".

He would, as usual, ignore the question and revert to his cliche statements that if we appease the Mullah's they will never attack Israel or they don't have the intention or capability to attack Israel. Just answer the question Mr. Obama, what if? What the F**K are you going to do? Have the guts to respond and show your true face.

There is a good chance that your hate for Bush administration will make a hero out of this imbicile and puts him in the white house. But, get ready for the demise of human race. Your children would be lucky to live thru armageden.....


Hillary is a bigot who'll

by sadegh on

Hillary is a bigot who'll say anything to get elected...She even changes her accent depending on which state she happens to be speaking in...With each passing day her credibility declines and her double-speak exposed for the opportunistic and self-aggrandizng garbage it is...


Excellent article

by Anonymous-today (not verified) on

These are facts that are routinely ignored in the US. In all the sound and the fury against the Islamic fundamentalism, people forget the US is and has always been a fundamentalist country itself. With all the rubbish about Iran wanting to bomb this and that people forget that the US government is full of Armageddonist Christians. By the way Mr. Weitzel sounds like he may be Jewish himself so let's not forget that some of the most articulate voices against the US and even Israeli aggression have been that of the Jews themselves. This is not a tribal war, but a universalist struggle against bigotry, hypocrisy and aggression regardless of who commits it.


She is a sellout

by Abarmard on

I wish I could say that we should not take these people seriously, but Iraq tells us otherwise