Posted on 01/14/2006 11:41:48 AM PST by wagglebee
In his sharpest comments to date on the Iranian nuclear crisis, President Bush warned Friday that Iran is seeking to produce nuclear weapons and intends to use them to destroy Israel.
Speaking at a joint press conference in Washington, D.C. with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Bush warned:
"I want to remind you that the current president of Iran has announced that the destruction of Israel is an important part of their agenda. And that's unacceptable. And the development of a nuclear weapon, it seems like to me, would make them a step closer to achieving that objective."
The president said that Iran's nuclear ambitions pose a threat, not just to the Jewish state, but to the world.
"Iran armed with a nuclear weapon poses a great threat to the security of the world. Countries such as ours have a great obligation to step up, working together to send a message to the Iranians that their behavior, trying to clandestinely develop a nuclear weapon, or using the guise of a civilian nuclear program to attain a nuclear weapon, is unacceptable."
For her part Chancellor Merkel added, "To Germany, it is totally unacceptable, what Iran said recently, especially regarding Israel and the Holocaust."
Last month, Iranian president Mamoud Ahmadinejad said that historical coverage of the Holocaust had been "exaggerated." In October he urged that Israel be "wiped off the map."
Ping.
Notice how dead quiet the left is on Iran?
This is America giving Israel green light and the EU resigning itself to what must be.
Whether it be Israel, the US alone or with NATO support, some entity has to make sure that Iran never builds a nuclear weapon. The destruction of Israel would mark the end to life as we know it in the ME.
spineless hypocrites.
I do not see why we do not make a public statement to the affect that if Iran ever launches so much as a single missile
towards Israel all of Iran will be massively targeted and it will cease to exist as a country capable of ever again supporting a human population....
Just tell um
Nobody will be able to say that intellegence is wrong, this idiot has come right out and said it. He needs to be destroyed.
my feeling is that we are in a high stakes poker game and Iran keeps trying to overplay their hand believing we are the weaker player.
The US will not make a move until Israel is nuked. The Democrats would call for Bush's removal stating that the weapons information was fabricated.
I say it is Israels move. Nuke 'em Dano!
You're not the only one who thinks something is going to happen, and happen in the not-too-distant future. Oil futures, which had been downtrending for a while after Katrina, started spiking back up around Christmas. The only explanation I can see is that traders are worried about a mideast conflict soon
I don't think Iran actually has a weapon, or they would have used it. Israel for certain has them, and I think this is Bush's way of giving them the "green light" to act as they see necessary to protect themselves.
Let's hope Israel doesn't go along with any nonsense the UN proposes.
Israel has no need to nuke any of those backwater, 12th century countries. They will just do standard air strikes on any suspected nuclear sites, infrastructure, and military bases. Remember, Israel can beat any of those guys in a matter of days with air power alone. No need for nukes. Besides, if they used nukes, their relationship with us would be, as they would say, kaput! If they stick to standard air strikes, don't be surprised to hear that we helped them out with some stealth fighters/bombers.
My 2 cents.
One can interpret Bush's quotes to arrive at an opinion about Iran's intentions, but Bush did not state that Iran intends to nuke Israel. He merely warned of the dangers of a nuclear-capable Iran.
Newsmax is a disservice.
I doubt very much that Israel would use a nuke to neuter the Iranian threat. They would use convention methods to destroy Iran's nuclear research and military centers, if anything.
The use of nukes would turn the world against Israel's tactics. If it must attack, it will be attacking by proxy for the Western nations. Keeping them on board is important for Israel.
I believe you are right ... still it's getting more and more interesting out there.
Yeah, could be.
If I were the leader of Israel I'd consider having a stroke around this time simply because of the incredible stress.
If I were an Iranian, I'd look for cover.
Typical NewsMax journalism. Bush said no such thing.
He may think it, and it might be true.
But he never said it.
I don't think that Iran will have a viable weapon by then. Israel's intelligence in the Middle East is better than they let on, I think they will launch a preemptive strike well before it's too late.
But mistakes happen. Who knows how far along they are with nukes? Don't kid yourself. They'll use them in less than a heartbeat to remove Israel. They are chomping at the bit to totally eliminate the Jews in Israel.
First, because the US has no mutual-defense treaty with Israel. Congress would need to approve one that authorizes the President to engage in a nuke attack on a country attacking Israel
Second, if the US exterminates Iran, then it's all-out, open war with every Islamic state in the world. With Iraq, we didn't exterminate the Iraqi people, we went in to get the leadership. With Iran, the response would need to be to hang the mullahcracy
I think that Israel will launch a coordinated strike on Iran (without prior US knowledge of course and be done with it.) I think we have already given them new planes and weapons systems for this task. We may take out Iran's anti aircraft positions along side them. It makes sense that we want to be flying the same planes as Israel so that we are indistinguishable if one gets shot down. We can maintain plausible deniability by pointing to the fact that we were in the process of withdrawing from the Middle East at the time of the attack which would seem to support our claim. In reality, we have no intention of getting into a ground war with Iran because we would run the risk of dragging China, Russia or North Korea into it.
Problem is you would kill about 20 million innocent iranians as collarteral damage along with the 20 million guilty ones.
Unless the way and time it takes to construct a hardened facility, conventional weapons should do the trick.
There's an Iranian FReeper that posts here. Name's Kashayar or something like that. Maybe we'll get the real story from him instead of NewsMax's "Remember the Maine!" journalism.
Agreed.
Iran is still years away from building The Bomb.
At least that's what I read....
Maybe, and maybe not. The Iranian nuclear and weapons facilities are hardened beyond anything Saddam even dreamed of. Part of that is geography, the Iranians have some pretty rugged mountains to bury stuff in.
It will take some pretty effective "bunker buster" type conventional weapons to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities, and it may or may not be possible with existing Israeli weapons, or even existing US weapons.
Russia has already given them nukes.
It is important to remember that nuclear weapons were developed over 60 years ago - - before computers, chips, and color television. The technological advances that have been made in everything since the development of a-bombs is simply beyond any rational description or deliberation. It's like comparing a magnifying glass to the Hubble. A-bombs are dinosaurs.
We also have the capability to detonate atomic bombs from space. If Iran or any other country attempts to launch a nuclear weapon at the US or an American ally will succed only in bringing apocalypse upon itself. The only question is whether we detonate the weapon on the ground or at the optimal latitude for maximum destruction.
I watched the press conference, and this is what President Bush said. His words were something to the effect of "Iran's stated policy is the destruction of Israel, and Nuclear weapons brings them closer to this objective." Seems close enough too me.
I noticed it. I wonder why?
Very very deep cover, if one must live near potential target areas. Fallout shelters if one lives farther away.
Don't forget that we will also be targeted using small nukes, either in containers, by rail, ship in several large cities..........
The problem is, they know that they may get nuked also, and.......the idea of being Martyr's complicates matters. One nation with nukes vs another with nukes is a standoff......because most nations find being a Martyr is not a good idea. This is the problem.......the get virgins in heaven.....or wherever they end up....
Could you ask all the innocent Iranians to move to one part of the country, and all the guilty ones to move to another part of the country?
I am curious what you feel would be the appropriate response to a nuclear attack on Israel?
During the cold war, the United States and the Soviet Union well understood what would occur if one side attacked with nuclear weapons.
As far as I know, Israel has not threaten the survival of any of it's neighbors. The threat of first use of nuclear weapons has only come from one side.
So, if Iran managed to explode a nuclear weapon in Israel, what should the rest of the world do?
The only explanation I can see is that traders are worried about a mideast conflict soon
Well, that's always a strong probability. Part of the price of doing business with them. But, I think you got it: a big one is imminent. I hope we're both wrong.
All of the entrances/exits can be destroyed by conventional weapons. Then, it doesn't matter what's underground if you can't get to it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.