Wanna know why Iran wants nukes? Isreal has them.

[iconoclastNYC]

Israel. Although Israel has neither confirmed nor denied that it possesses nuclear weapons, the DIA concluded in 1999 that Israel had produced 60-80 warheads. Israel is estimated to have produced enough fissile material for between 115 and 190 warheads. The DIA projected that Israel's stockpile would increase only modestly by 2020.

http://www.thebulletin.org/article_nn.php?art_ofn=ja06norris

[Lefty48197]

1. Iran wants to USE nuclear weapons against Israel

That's why Iran wants nuclear bombs.

[iconoclastNYC]

2. Right.

[Behind the Aegis]

5. But will people care, I mean other than Israelis?

[iconoclastNYC]

6. You really think that Iran wants to nuke Iran?

We'd nuke Iran in response. Mutually assured destruction.

Oh right I forgot...Iran is evil, and therefore not rational.

[Behind the Aegis]

7. That makes no sense.

I am guesing you meant to say: "You really think that Iran wants to nuke (Israel)?"

They say it, so we need to take them at face value.

Oh right I forgot...Israel is evil, and therefore not important.

[iconoclastNYC]

8. Who says that?

Do u have a source for that?

[Behind the Aegis]

10. You have a source for yours?

Somehow I think you were making a "blanket" statement. I simply did the same. And there are a few people here that wish to see the end of Israel and they aren't even crackpot despots, like the Iranian president.

[Douglas Carpenter]

9. Iran never said that

link: http://www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=99...

snip:"it is often alleged that since Iran harbors the desire to “destroy” Israel, it must not be allowed to have the bomb. Ahmadinejad has gone blue in the face denouncing the immorality of any mass extermination of innocent civilians, but has been unable to get a hearing in the English-language press. Moreover, the presidency is a very weak post in Iran, and the president is not commander of the armed forces and has no control over nuclear policy. Ahmadinejad’s election is not relevant to the nuclear issue, and neither is the question of whether he is, as Liz Cheney is reported to have said, “a madman.” Iran has not behaved in a militarily aggressive way since its 1979 revolution, having invaded no other countries, unlike Iraq, Israel or the U.S. Washington has nevertheless succeeded in depicting Iran as a rogue state"

[Behind the Aegis]

11. The current Iranian president said it!

[iconoclastNYC]

12. You got a link?

[Behind the Aegis]

14. I suppose an Iranian source will suffice.

Ahmadinejad: Supporters of Israel will face wrath of Islamic ummah

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad warned countries or leaders who have taken measures to acknowledge the Zionist regime under pressure or due to lack of sound understanding that they will be confronted with the wrath of the Islamic ummah and will forever be disgraced. Speaking at a conference dubbed "World without Zionism" here Wednesday which was attended by thousands of students, he said any country which acknowledges the Zionist regime will actually be acknowledging the surrender and defeat of the Islamic world. He further expressed his firm belief that the new wave of confrontations generated in Palestine and the growing turmoil in the Islamic world would in no time wipe Israel away. Ahmadinejad referred to the Zionist regime's recent withdrawal from the Gaza Strip as a "trick," saying Gaza is part of Palestinian territory and the withdrawal was meant to make Islamic states acknowledge the Zionist regime of Israel. Pointing to the evil attempts of the US and Israel to saw discord among warring forces in Palestine and other parts of the Islamic world, the president said such attempts were aimed at forcing some Islamic countries to acknowledge the existence of Israel. .

source

[iconoclastNYC]

16. Nice try.

As I read it, he's making a prediction about the Palestine situation, and didn't mention nuclear weapons as you have claimed.

[Behind the Aegis]

18. It was not my intention to say he said he would "nuke" Israel.

It was my intention to say he has said that Israel should be wiped from the map and NOW he wants nukes? They can't currently wipe Israel off the map, but with nukes, his threat could become a reality! And, i still contend very few would give a shit!

[iconoclastNYC]

20. Well you said it:

I am guesing you meant to say: "You really think that Iran wants to nuke (Israel)?"

They say it, so we need to take them at face value.

[Behind the Aegis]

26. And the operative word is "it."

However, I guess I should have been more clear, so I will spell "it" out for you:

"They say it (they wish to see Israel wiped from the map), so we need to take them at face value (because now they are trying to obtain weapons that make their rhetoric a reality).

Help?

[iconoclastNYC]

30. Where does he say that he wishes it to be wiped off the map?

Not in your quotation. He makes a prediction about the palestian situation and it doesn't say anything about "wishing" it to happen.

If I say that the sun will rise tommorow it doesn't mean i wish it to happen.

[Behind the Aegis]

32. The Iranian source is a summary.

The Iranian source confirms the use of "wiped away." The speech he gave included more...."wiped away from the map (or pages of history)."

[iconoclastNYC]

33. So you say.

Again, no links. You've been saying black is white and now you are saying it is blue, again with no proof.

[Behind the Aegis]

35. Ahmadinejad: Wipe Israel off map

"The establishment of the Zionist regime was a move by the world oppressor against the Islamic world," the president told a conference in Tehran on Wednesday, entitled The World without Zionism.

"The skirmishes in the occupied land are part of a war of destiny. The outcome of hundreds of years of war will be defined in Palestinian land," he said.

"As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map," said Ahmadinejad, referring to Iran's revolutionary leader Ayat Allah Khomeini.

His comments were the first time in years that such a high-ranking Iranian official has called for Israel's eradication, even though such slogans are still regularly used at government
rallies.

Aljazeera

[alvarezadams]

45. Still with the mistranslation?

Gawd.

[Behind the Aegis]

47. ??

Your telling me an Arabic source mistranslated a Farsi statement? While possible, I think they probably have better translations than most Western sources. Incidentally, the same phraseology is used on the official Iranian presidential website. So, you know Farsi better then they do?!

Gawd, indeed!

[alvarezadams]

49. ???

"Your telling me an Arabic source mistranslated a Farsi statement?"

The mistranslation is notorious - except amongst those who only follow mainstream media. And Al Jazeera isn't exactly known as being pro-Iranian.

[alvarezadams]

50. Want Al Jazeera?

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/F497A302-79E2-46D7-9416-DBC764F69F9B.htm

[Behind the Aegis]

54. Spin, spin, spin!

Typical. It wasn't good enough for the translation, which is what the argument was. It was that he was "misunderstood." What the fuck ever!

Why are sources propaganda if they paint Israel and the US in a positive or neutral light, but paint the Arab world the same way and it's gospel? double standards!

[Behind the Aegis]

51. And the Iranian presidential site?

I guess they mistranslated too? :eyes:

[The Magistrate]

22. As A Matter Of Curiousity, Sir

Do you think the belief Israel will be wiped away is held by the man independent of a feeling this would be a good thing, and do you think, if he feels it a good thing, he would not strive to bring it about, as people tend to do when they think an end is a good one?

[iconoclastNYC]

24. You are changing the subject.

If you say black is white and can't back it up with facts I'm going to call you out on it.

If you twist people's words to make yourself seem right, I'm going to call you out on it.

[The Magistrate]

34. The Only Point Of Interest To Me In The Matter, Sir

Is the fact of serious hostility between the Islamic Republic of Iran and its leadership, and Israel, and whether or not this can sensibly viewed as extending to desire by the former to destroy the latter. If it can, and there is no particular reason to dounb it on the record of statements and actions going back a quarter of a century, then this particular quibble over precise translation really has very little point.

[Andromeda]

36. Ah, come on, gimme a friggin' break!

Iran wants Israel to be wiped away. Now, that doesn't tell us how or when but it tells us that Ahmadinejad wants Israel not to exist. He also doesn't say if he is going to accomplish that through war, nukes or---prayer.

Maybe he will invoke Allah to destroy Israel by flood, famine or disease. I doubt that because Israel has some pretty powerful juju of their own.

Now, Ahmadinejad wants nukes and he hasn't convinced us that he just wants to use it for energy.

This threat hangs over Israel and if they do have nukes, and they probably do, that is the only thing keeping them from being vaporized by a country like Iran.

You do know, don't you, that there is a high state of tension between Israel, Iran and Arab states.

[tkmorris]

39. And so?

Israel wants Iran to not exist as well. Israel wants the Palestinian problem (people? nation? Call it what you will) to not exist. And yet they exercise restraint. Barely.

Just because a nation truly despises it's neighbor and wishes it were gone does NOT mean it will launch a pre-emptive nuclear attack. The entire nuclear question is ugly on it's face; schoolyard bullies defining who can, and who cannot, have the means to defend themselves in the ultimate conflict.

[Douglas Carpenter]

15. I can find no evidence to support that

he ever advocated a nuclear attack on Israel or anyone else. He would not have the authority to launch such an attack. The final Authority which is with the Supreme Religious leader gave a binding fatwa against any use of nuclear weapons.

There are apocalyptic religious statements relating to the return of 12th Imam which are little different than the apocalyptic religious statements coming in numerous directions. Should we take as political statements Christian fundamentalist talk of the return of Christ when the Jewish people will be compelled to convert? I hope not. Do we take as political statements the more extreme end of "fundamentalist" Judaism(also supported by many fundamentalist Christians) which calls for the total destruction of the Dome of the Rock and the Al Aqsa Mosque so the Temple of Solomon can be rebuilt? I hope not.

However still there is no evidence that the President of Iran who is not commander and chief of the military anyway and has no authority on such matters has ever expressed a desire to nuke Israel or anyone else. But there is a clear binding fatwa from the one who does have the authority against any use of nuclear weapons.

[Behind the Aegis]

19. I wasn't implying he advocated nuking Israel,...

...my intention was to point out that he HAS said Israel should be wiped from the map and is now wanting weapons that could very easily do just that!

[iconoclastNYC]

25. He didn't even say that

He said that the thought the Palestian conflict would be Isreal's downfall.

[Behind the Aegis]

27. WIPED FROM THE MAP

read the damn statement from the office in Iran!

[iconoclastNYC]

28. I did.

And it doesn't say what you claim it does. Nice try.

[Behind the Aegis]

31. "Wiped away"

And from the other source the entire quote was "Israel should be wiped from the map (pages of history)."

[Douglas Carpenter]

29. if he did he would be desecrating some of the holiest sites of Islam

and Christianity as well as holy lands of Muslims and Christians, killing at least hundreds of thousands of Muslims if not millions of Muslims including hundreds of thousands if not millions of Shiite Muslims in Southern Lebanon. And this does not even include a retaliatory strike.

No sane person wants Iran to acquire nuclear weapons -- but we have to look at some basic facts.

1. There is no actual evidence that they are working on it at least according to the IAEA

2. The President of Iran does not have the authority to launch such a strike

3. The President of Iran has said that he deplores any mass killing of civilian under any circumstances.

4. The one with the authority has delivered a binding fatwa against it under any circumstances.

4. The deterrence factor of any such strike is overwhelming

[joe_shmoe]

13. Subject: Oh - come on - this is just pathetic

Let's see - how many countries has Iran invaded?

Name one reason Israel can violate international law and tell the world to go fuck themselves when it comes to their nukes?

Also, are we so sure that Ahmadinejad's really said he wanted to "Wipe Israel off the map"???

I'm not so sure - why don't you try disputing these:

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/jonathan_steele/200...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Is...

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/06/11/news/iran.php

http://www.slate.com/id/2140947/fr/rss /

http://www.canadiancontent.net/forums/archive/o_t/t_149...


Let's try to start going a little deeper into the issues rather than this pathetic water cooler osmosis bullshit.

[Behind the Aegis]

17. What is pathetic is this crap.

Israel has supposedly had nukes for years, yet it is now the impetus for the Iranians for wanting nukes? Yeah, right!

Did you know that Israel is not a member of the NPT, but Iran IS!

"Also, are we so sure that Ahmadinejad's really said he wanted to "Wipe Israel off the map"???"

Well, it seems the translators at the official site for the president of Iran seem pretty certain.

Ahmadinejad: Supporters of Israel will face wrath of Islamic ummah

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad warned countries or leaders who have taken measures to acknowledge the Zionist regime under pressure or due to lack of sound understanding that they will be confronted with the wrath of the Islamic ummah and will forever be disgraced. Speaking at a conference dubbed "World without Zionism" here Wednesday which was attended by thousands of students, he said any country which acknowledges the Zionist regime will actually be acknowledging the surrender and defeat of the Islamic world. He further expressed his firm belief that the new wave of confrontations generated in Palestine and the growing turmoil in the Islamic world would in no time wipe Israel away. Ahmadinejad referred to the Zionist regime's recent withdrawal from the Gaza Strip as a "trick," saying Gaza is part of Palestinian territory and the withdrawal was meant to make Islamic states acknowledge the Zionist regime of Israel. Pointing to the evil attempts of the US and Israel to saw discord among warring forces in Palestine and other parts of the Islamic world, the president said such attempts were aimed at forcing some Islamic countries to acknowledge the existence of Israel. .

source

[iconoclastNYC]

21. I don't see that in the quote.

What I see is a prediction which doesn't touch on intent at all.

[Terran1212]

23. Doubt it. No reason to think such a thing.

[Douglas Carpenter]

3. Iran and Nukes

from: Fishing for a Pretext in Iran

by Juan Cole; March 18, 2006

link: http://www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=9929

snip:"it is often alleged that since Iran harbors the desire to “destroy” Israel, it must not be allowed to have the bomb. Ahmadinejad has gone blue in the face denouncing the immorality of any mass extermination of innocent civilians, but has been unable to get a hearing in the English-language press. Moreover, the presidency is a very weak post in Iran, and the president is not commander of the armed forces and has no control over nuclear policy. Ahmadinejad’s election is not relevant to the nuclear issue, and neither is the question of whether he is, as Liz Cheney is reported to have said, “a madman.” Iran has not behaved in a militarily aggressive way since its 1979 revolution, having invaded no other countries, unlike Iraq, Israel or the U.S. Washington has nevertheless succeeded in depicting Iran as a rogue state"

snip:"Supreme Jurisprudent Ali Khamenei has given a fatwa or formal religious ruling against nuclear weapons, and President Ahmadinejad at his inauguration denounced such arms and committed Iran to remaining a nonnuclear weapons state. (Note: Grand Ayatollah Khamenei is the Chief of State and He ALONE has the final say in matters of the Iranian state and the final religious authority over the vast overwhelming majority of Iranian Shiites. Here is an official website that explains the Iranian government:link: http://www.parstimes.com/gov_iran.html
This is the statement regarding Ayatollah Khamanei's fatwa which comes from the website of the Islamic Republic of Iran – link:
http://www.irna.ir/en/news/view/menu-236/0508104135124631.htm )


snip: "in November of 2003 the IAEA formally announced that it could find no proof of such a weapons program. The U.S. reaction was a blustery incredulity, which is not actually an argument or proof in its own right, however good U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton is at bunching his eyebrows and glaring."


___________________________________________

"I think of war with Iran as the ending of America's present role in the world. Iraq may have been a preview of that, but it's still redeemable if we get out fast. In a war with Iran, we'll get dragged down for 20 or 30 years. The world will condemn us. We will lose our position in the world."

Zbigniew Brzezinski, Vanity Fair, 2006.

________________________________

Iranian showdown – great resource page:

http://reseaudesign.com/research/iran/iran_summery.html

______________________



http://www.dontattackiran.org

[MGD]

4. That's only a minor part of it IMHO

I think they want to set themselves up as the uncontested regional superpower in order to export oil under terms more favorable to their national economic interests; furthermore, I think President Ahmedinejhad wants to use the whole concept of "Iran's manifest destiny/right to have nuclear energy" as a political patriotic tool much in the way that GW has exploited his own version of patriotism for his political gain as well as the political gain of his party. GW managed to leave America in a position of weakness from which to negotiate w/ Mahmoud and has been taken to task for it. What's more, Ahmedinejhad looks like a very strong leader when he fearlessly spits in the eye of the Great Satan.

"Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel."
Samuel Johnson

[nadinbrzezinski]

37. Wrong answer actually

we, yes WE surround them on all sides...

And they have seen we are unwilling to play real hardball with the N.Koreans who actually are suspected of having them.

As to Israel, you know what a good generation or two of MAD might be good for the long term stability of the area.

[anewdeal]

38. One (not so) minor difference

Israel doesn't seem like it intends to use those Nukes on Iran.

The leaders of Iran (not the people) have stated they would use Nukes on Israel. Maybe they were only being threatening and don't really intend to, but they are in a position were they must be taken seriously.

[MGD]

40. I think, if anything, Ahmedinejhad is posturing to his electorate

I don't think he would use nuclear weapons against Israel in the first place but, frankly, I'm not sure how much I would care if he did. I would be more concerned about him giving plutonium to every 3rd world dictator that held a grudge against the Great Satan. Incidentaly, I think Israel would absolutely use nukes against Iran if Israel felt sufficiently threatened.

[anewdeal]

43. I do happen to care if Iran nukes Israel

that would be a bad thing in my book, and I'd support action to not allow it to happen.

[cali]

44. Your sentiments are revolting and don't

reflect positively on you. I care desperately that nukes aren't used anywhere. Do you have any fucking idea what a nuke dropped on Israel would do to the world? How foolish can any one individual be?

[Douglas Carpenter]

41. dupe

[Douglas Carpenter]

42. Iranian Supreme Leader's binding fatwa against nukes

Supreme Iranian leader – Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is the Chief of State and He ALONE has the final say in matters of the Iranian state and the final religious authority over the vast overwhelming majority of Iranian Shiites.

Here is an official website that explains the Iranian government:

link: http://www.parstimes.com/gov_iran.html


Ayatollah Khamenei issued a fatwa against nuclear weapons last August.

In the Iranian system the elected parliament and president have limited powers. By far the single most powerful person is Chief of State Supreme Leader Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. He has the final say. No other mullah, ayatollah or marja’a can override Ayatollah Khamanei’s fatwa. It is irrevocable. In addition to his political position--within the Shiite version of Islam he is what is known as a marja'a. Ayatollah Sistani in Iraq is also a a marja'a. A fatwa is a final religious decision absolutely binding on all Shiites within that marja'a's domain. All fatwas issued by a maja'a are written down and publicly announced. This carries almost as much weight as sacred scripture; almost as if it was in the Koran.

This is the statement regarding Ayatollah Khamanei's fatwa which comes from the website of the Islamic Republic of Iran - link:

http://www.irna.ir/en/news/view/menu-236/0508104135124631.htm

Iran, holder of peaceful nuclear fuel cycle technology
Vienna, Aug 10, 2005
Iran-Nuclear-Statement
Iran is a nuclear fuel cycle technology holder, a capability which is exclusively for peaceful purposes, a statement issued by the Islamic republic at the emergency meeting of the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) read here Tuesday evening.
The Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has issued the Fatwa that the production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons are forbidden under Islam and that Iran shall never acquire these weapons, it added.
The full text of the statement is as follows:
"Madam chair, colleagues,
"We meet when the world is remembering the atomic bombings of the civilians in Hiroshima (Aug 6) and Nagasaki (Aug 9) sixty years ago.
The savagery of the attack, the human suffering it caused, the scale of the civilian loss of life turning individuals, old and young, into ashes in a split second, and maiming indefinitely those who survived should never be removed from our memory. It is the most absurd manifestation of irony that the single state who caused this single nuclear catastrophe in a twin attack on our earth now has assumed the role of the prime preacher in the nuclear field while ever expanding its nuclear weapons capability.
"We as members of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) are proud to underline that none of the NPT members of the NAM rely on nuclear weapons in any way for their security. That is not the case of many other states, who either possess nuclear weapons or are member of nuclear-armed alliances and it is such states that have taken on the self-assigned role of denying Iran its legal rights under the NPT to access the peaceful uses of nuclear technology in conformity with the treaty's non-proliferation obligations.
"Indeed, it is not only Iran but also many members of NAM that are denied the peaceful uses of nuclear technology by some of the NPT nuclear-weapon states and their allies through the mechanisms of export controls and other denial arrangements. In 1995, they adopted the so-called "Iran clause" under which they agreed to deny nuclear technology to Iran in any circumstances.
"You can then understand, why Iran after being denied nuclear technology in violation of the NPT, had no other option but to rely on indigenous efforts with precaution on full transparency and we succeeded in developing our nuclear technology. Iran is a nuclear fuel cycle technology holder, a capability which is exclusively for peaceful purposes.
"The Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has issued the Fatwa that the production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons are forbidden under Islam and that the Islamic Republic of Iran shall never acquire these weapons. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who took office just recently, in his inaugural address reiterated that his government is against weapons of mass destruction and will only pursue nuclear activities in the peaceful domain. The leadership of Iran has pledged at the highest level that Iran will remain a non-nuclear-weapon state party to the NPT and has placed the entire scope of its nuclear activities under IAEA safeguards and additional protocol, in addition to undertaking voluntary transparency measures with the agency that have even gone beyond the requirements of the agency's safeguard system.

http://www.irna.ir/en/news/view/menu-236/0508104135124631.htm

[alvarezadams]

46. I disagree

One of the first things taught to me in history was to look at maps. Countries see the world from an "ethnocentric" pov - we look at the world from the POV of the US, Iran with Iran in the center.

What does Iran see? It sees itself virtually surrounded by the forces of a nation that has:

1. Supported fascistic regimes.
2. Overthrew a democratically-elected government in order for a pro-oil reign of terror to happen.
3. Jilted them of billions in potential oil profits over the decades.
4. Shot down a passenger jet, killing all on board.
5. Supports the common enemy of Islam's continuing oppression of the Palestinians.
6. Etc. etc. etc., not the least of which being the labelling of Iran as a rogue nation, part of the Axis of Evil.

Given the US' history and having not a little military might right next door, why would Iran want nukes? And given N. Korea's "get out of jail free" card (which they got once they acquired nukes, just like every other nuclear nation), whaddya think?

Israel certainly has something to do with it. I think that the US has a lot more to do with it though.

[Igel]

48. I agree that this is part of the reason.

No further intent to use is needed; this is sufficient.

For the great, pious, faithful Iran to not have technology that the stupid, inferior, corrupt Jews have ... quite a smack-down as far as honor is concerned.

For the stupid, inferior, corrupt Jews (and other stupid, inferior, and corrupt kafir and polytheists) to have nuclear weapons is a hindrance to the Way the World Must Be. Having the grand ranking of submissions all out of kilter ... gotta be hard on the psyche.

Not only haven't they submitted, they've usurped waqf.

This doesn't even get into Persian nationalism.

[maxsolomon]

52. i love all threads about Israel

so much agreement, so much common ground. :boring:

israel has nukes
iran wants nukes
israel would launch in retaliation for a nuke attack
iran is not dumb enough to use them first

there are no guarantees.

[deaniac21]

53. I can't imagine and I don't understand how anyone could

ascribe any sort of evil intent from the leadership of Iran to the west or to Israel. They are known practitioners of the religion of peace and have no history of violence. I only wish we had leaders of this type in our country. Maybe then we wouldn't be despised by the rest of the world.

[RDU Socialist]

55. no history of violence?

you mean besides the violent revolution in 1979?

or their support of al qaeda?

besides those things, right?

[Solon]

56. Learn history...

First, they fought a fascist dictatorship in 1979, one where OUR CIA and Gestapo trained troops used the American Embassy as a staging ground FOR that dictatorship. To say they had a revolution just because they are violent would mean our own revolution means we are also intristically violent, saying they WEREN'T justified in their actions means neither were we back in 1776.

[alvarezadams]

57. Perhaps you mean

the violent US-fomented revolution against a popularly-elected government and our subsequent support of a fascistic dictator that was overthrown by the one of 1979?

As for their support of Al Qaeda - why would a Shiite nation support a Sunni movement?

[Douglas Carpenter]

58. Iran could not possibly support Al Qaeda -- that is absurd

No knowledgeable party has ever even alleged something so preposterous.
Al Qaeda is fiercely and murderously hostile to the Shiites -- the overwhelmingly dominant group in Iran. In fact Iran was supporting armed resistance against their arch-enemies -- the Talaban of Afghanistan long before the U.S. involvement.

The Revolution of 1979 would probably be one of the least violent total revolutions in history.

Please do not interpret these comments as sympathy for the regime. That is not my intent.