2003 Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Slams Clinton's "Obliteration" Remark: She is Exception to the Norm

"Occasionally we run across women who are worse warmongers than men," Ms. Shirin Ebadi, the 2003 Nobel Peace Prize laureate, told me in an interview. I had asked her opinion about Sen. Clinton's latest remark on the "obliteration" of Iran if it were to launch a nuke attack against Israel. Ms. Ebadi, who is one of the most outspoken human rights activists in the world today, continued:

Women usually stand at the forefront of peace activism, because they suffer the most during a war. They lose husbands and sons and are sometimes raped during a war. That's why most women seek peace. Of course there are always exceptions to the norm.

I hope Mrs. Clinton made those statements in search of the votes of extremists in her country, not as her personal belief. She has said that if Israel is threatened in any way, she will obliterate Iran.
It saddens me to see a woman abandon her position of peace and construction and think about war and destruction. I would say it is not possible to obliterate a country with a 3,000-year old history. Perhaps, as Mrs. Clinton suggests, military bombers can "obliterate" a few places in Iran, but you cannot obliterate 3,000 years of history.

My reply to people such as Mrs. Clinton, who use their fear of Israel's destruction as an excuse to attack Iran, is to remind them that Iran has been a refuge for Jewish people since the era of Cyrus The Great. Jews have lived peacefully in Iran for centuries. One of their oldest and most famous settlements is in Iran. Iran must be judged by its 3,000-year history, not by its performance over the past 30 years after the Islamic Revolution, or the past two years, since Ahmadinejad [came into office in 2005].

The Iranian government has never declared any plans to attack Israel. Certain current rhetoric has created excuses for an attack on Iran, the likes of which Mrs. Clinton suggests.

Follow Omid Memarian on Twitter: www.twitter.com/omid_m

Comments

[kusalarhetoric]

What a wonderful and eloquent response. At a conference in Hiroshiima, I heard Ms. Ebadi explain an interesting saga surrounding the publication of her book, Iran Awakening. Because of the sanctions, she could not publish the book in the U.S. However, hers being a special circumstance, the publisher wished to apply for an exemption. She said no, the law was unfair and should be changed. As the result of a campaign, it changed. Other authors, who had been banned from publication in the U.S., were greatly appreciative of her efforts.

She was gracious to understand Clinton's, "search of the votes of extremists." Perhaps because of the Senator's gaffe, and with the help of this Obamaesque response, the number of those votes available for pandering to, will decrease.

[Anonani]

I can really appreciate the comments of Ms. Ebadi. It really never occurred to me, even once, that HRC would "go there". The fact that she did was one of the largest betrayals to my fantasy of what a female would bring to the political discourse. President! She could've been President and we would have had to deal with her itchy finger if that red phone rang at 3:00am. The world has known since Nagasaki and Hiroshima that we have the "big stick". It is no longer necessary to prove it.

[tbone99]

Why are we considering a country like Isreal that spies on us, steals from us( nuclear secrets), steers us into actions that hurt us ( Iraq) and bribes our politicians to the the tune of 70million a year, an ally?
They don't even have to register as a foreign lobbying entity, thats what a hold they have on American politicians!

http://www.monabaker.com/pMachine/more.php?id=A2797_0_1_0_M

[Gma11]

Beautifully articulated!!

[NorVaGal]

Thanks for a great post. It goes without saying that ANY country would take immediate and severe retaliatory actions against attacks on itself or its allies. Self-defense is a GIVEN and justifiable reaction. However, pre-emptive bully talk about obliterating an entire country, innocents as well as military targets, to score political points is detrimental to world peace efforts and preservation of our planet. Oldtime hard-liners in every country are gradually being replaced by new generations who are more receptive to the concepts of global collaboration and cooperation. The kindness of U.S. service people all over the world continues to win the hearts and goodwill of others much more effectively than harsh words and bombs ever have. We are poised on the edge of a new era, where a new leader can set the tone for conciliation by talking the talk and then walking the walk toward global peace and harmony. The eyes of the world are watching this election. Which path will America take: a gamble on a new way of interacting with our global neighbors or will we succumb to the allure of familiar old-time politics?

[jupitor]

I have said this before and I will say it again! When she said she would "Obliterate" Iran she broke the Internation Laws set out by the United Nations! A law that 50 countries have signed! Obliterate a Whole Nation can be done only one way! That to use Nuclear Bombs! To even threaten that against another Nation was and is breaking our International Laws! She gets away with it because she is a Clinton and it seems they can break what ever laws they want, includeing campagne laws as she did in 2000 by not givesing a accurate account of the campagne funds given by Peter Paul! When she finally admitted the fraud to the F.E.C, they allowed her to make a false fourth statement to bury it! This just brings back to mind how little the Clinton believes in obeying our laws! Rather it be the U.S. laws or the international Laws! This in fact tells us how Other Nations must feel toward Hillary, and what she said must make them very suspiciouse of how stable she would be in a time of panic!

[hopeless277]

It's really not about Israel at all. They would just be the excuse to steal more oil. We really don't give a rat's ass about the Jewish state itself. What we like is that it's smack dab in the middle of all that OIL. Texas T, black gold. So don't worry, no one is going to attack Iran over Israel. We'll attack them over OIL. I hope that makes everyone feel better.

[tbone99]

If that was true why would Isreali lobbying groups spend more than 70 million to U.S politicians a year to make sure their viewpoint is the only one considered?After all they could save the money, knowing that oil was their ace in the hole, when it camt to defense.

[Softnsweet]

I am not a Hillary supporter but I think Hillary said that if they Iran using nuclear weapons on Israel than she would obliteration" them. Not if they threaten them. Am I right?

[ScroogeandMarleyLLC]

Sorry, but only those folks ignorant of the staid American tradition of political ballyhooing take anything presidential candidates say seriously during a campaign. It's merely telling the commoners what they want to hear, playing the crowd's emotions.

So, please tell your foreign lady friend to relax; Hillary is not really going to blow up her fatherland!

[CyrusBeaucephus]

She is recklessly hawkish due to trying to overreact. What a mess of a human being she is. I'm so relieved that she has run a terrible campaign and will not get the nomination