Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush: Threat of World War III if Iran goes nuclear
Reuters ^ | Matt Spetalnick

Posted on 10/17/2007 2:00:08 PM PDT by 300magnum

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush warned on Wednesday a nuclear-armed Iran could lead to World War III as he tried to shore up international opposition to Tehran amid Russian skepticism over its nuclear ambitions.

Bush was speaking a day after Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has resisted Western pressure to toughen his stance over Iran's nuclear program, made clear on a visit to Tehran that Russia would not accept any military action against Iran.

At a White House news conference, Bush expressed hope Putin would brief him on his talks in Tehran and said he would ask him to clarify recent remarks on Iran's nuclear activities.

Putin said last week that Russia, which is building Iran's first atomic power plant, would "proceed from the position" that Tehran had no plans to develop nuclear weapons but he shared international concerns that its nuclear programs "should be as transparent as possible."

"The thing I'm interested in is whether or not he continues to harbor the same concerns that I do," Bush said. "When we were in Australia (in September), he reconfirmed to me that he recognizes it's not in the world's interest for Iran to have the capacity to make a nuclear weapon."

Bush, who has insisted he wants a diplomatic solution to the Iranian issue, is pushing for a third round of U.N. sanctions against Iran.

Russia, a veto-holding member of the Security Council, backed two sets of limited U.N. sanctions against Iran but has resisted any tough new measures.

Stepping up his rhetoric, Bush said a nuclear-armed Iran would pose a "dangerous threat to world peace."

"We've got a leader in Iran who has announced that he wants to destroy Israel," he said. "So I've told people that, if you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon."

PUTIN'S "SPECIAL MESSAGE"

Iran rejects accusations it is seeking to develop a nuclear bomb, saying it wants nuclear technology for peaceful civilian purposes such as power generation, and has refused to heed U.N. Security Council demands to halt sensitive uranium enrichment.

Chief Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani was quoted by Iran's official IRNA news agency on Wednesday as saying that Putin had delivered a "special message" on its atomic program and other issues. No other details were given.

Putin's visit on Tuesday was watched closely because of Moscow's possible leverage in the Islamic Republic's nuclear standoff with the West. It was the first time a Kremlin chief went to Iran since Josef Stalin in 1943.

Asked about Putin's "special message," U.S. State Department spokesman Tom Casey said he was not aware of any deal or offer put forward by Moscow to Tehran over the nuclear program.

On Russian opposition to Caspian Sea states being used to launch attacks against Iran, Casey reiterated that Bush kept all his options on the table but that the United States was committed to the diplomatic path with Tehran.

(Additional reporting by Frederick Dahl in Tehran and Sue Pleming in Washington)


TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: ahmadinejad; bush; deathbymuslims; iran; iraniannukes; islam; jihad; killmenow; letsgetitoverwith; nuclear; ohno; persians; religionofpeace; spartansixdelta; thermopylae; worldwariii; wot; ww3; wwiii; xerxes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-150 next last
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Can you splain to me how the Armies of the world are going to fit into that very small valley?
41 posted on 10/17/2007 4:28:09 PM PDT by mad_as_he$$ (Do you want to be right or successful!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: billmor

That may be, but they will have no customers for fifty years if they shut down the world economy, and when it returns guess who will be walking all over the ME.


42 posted on 10/17/2007 4:29:00 PM PDT by RightWhale (50 years later we're still sitting on the ground)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$

The entire population of earth could fit into Texas with plenty of room, so fitting the armies of earth into the valley wouldn’t be that much of a problem. After a while it would be even less of a problem.


43 posted on 10/17/2007 4:32:41 PM PDT by RightWhale (50 years later we're still sitting on the ground)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
Have you been to the area? I have and you couldn't even fit an American Mechanised Division into the valley.

Where is Armageddon? Armageddon is the Hebrew name forThe mountain of Megiddo. Megiddo is the name of a city which is located in the Plain of Es-draelon, a Y shaped region about 15 miles southeast of present day Haifa, Israel. In the Old Testament it is the Valley of Jezreel, and the Valley of Megiddo. More battles have been fought on this plain than on any other battlefield in the world.

Then they gathered the kings together, to the place that in Hebrew is called Arma-geddon. The seventh angel poured out his bowl [vial] into the air, and out of the temple came a loud voice from the throne, saying, "It is done!" Then there came flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder and a severe earthquake. No earthquake like it has ever occurred since man has been on earth, so tremendous was the quake. The great city split into three parts, and the cities of the nations collapsed. God re-membered Babylon the Great and gave her the cup filled with the fury of his wrath. Every island fled away and the mountains could not be found. From the sky huge hail-stones of about a hundred pounds each fell upon men. And they cursed God¼ because the plague of hail was so terrible. ­Revelation 16:16-21 NIV

So either the Bible says what it says or it doesn't. BTW Armageddon is only mentioned ONCE in Rev. 16.

Again I ask - How do you fit all of the armies of the kings into this small area?

44 posted on 10/17/2007 4:42:15 PM PDT by mad_as_he$$ (Do you want to be right or successful!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: 300magnum

Pretty funny watching the world’s press reaction to the stutterer threatening a nuclear WWIII. In his own charming fashion he may have actually made Achmadphlegmajihad and the Born Again Communist Putin rethink their options and back off.

But not for long.

FWIW I have long maintained that a significant conventional military force is the best deterrent to the use of nuclear weapons, on our part. With a large standing army we can project our interests, as we wish, anywhere on the planet when the need dictates. Unfortunately we have depleted our conventional forces to a dangerously low level which renders us irrelevant in force projection.

We currently do not have the conventional forces needed to fully secure Iraq, let alone threaten Iran, North Korea, China or any of the other despotic nations aligned against us.

IMHO it is imperative that we increase our standing military forces to pre-Gulf War I levels as soon as is possible.

We can make nuclear threats only for so long.....


45 posted on 10/17/2007 4:49:09 PM PDT by Milwaukee_Guy (Don't hit them between the eyes. Hit them right -in- the eyes!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$

The Turks wiped out the Mongol cohort not far from there and it was close but the tight space worked to their benefit. They were shoulder to shoulder of course. Once the oil runs out the armies will be shoulder to shoulder again. They will all march in and none will come out and they will all fit, space magically appearing in front of them. Late arrivals will have to swim since the blood will be neck deep.


46 posted on 10/17/2007 4:51:33 PM PDT by RightWhale (50 years later we're still sitting on the ground)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: laconic
The Iraq war has gone just so well that our “conservative” President can’t wait to start another meaningless, incredibly wasteful and goal-less war in the Mideast over Iran

Actually a student of history would instantly recognize that the war went well. The peacekeeping operation in Iraq has gone moderately OK as well by historical standards. However expectations of nice tidy wars with no casualties have increased.

47 posted on 10/17/2007 4:52:49 PM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: laconic

Maybe you think the war in Iraq has not gone well, but a lot of people think it’s improving and we need to hold onto a base in the Middle East from which we can project our power and work to democratize the region.

And if we take out Iran, it won’t be goal-less. Our goals will be to remove Iran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons and to bring about regime change in Iran.

The result will be an arc of democratic, pro-American states from Iraq, through Iran and to Afghanistan. This result will be transformational for the Middle East.


48 posted on 10/17/2007 4:56:13 PM PDT by FFranco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: LibertyRocks

Russia is emboldened because the traitorous Dims control Congress and have pretty much marginalized and emasculated Bush. Russia is further emboldened because it believes a marxist (either Her Thighness or B. Hussein) will win the presidential election in 2008. To Pootie, things are looking pretty good, and he feels he can strut some stuff.


49 posted on 10/17/2007 5:05:55 PM PDT by ought-six ("Give me liberty, or give me death!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

We would nuke the ME before the oil runs out.


50 posted on 10/17/2007 5:09:38 PM PDT by mad_as_he$$ (Do you want to be right or successful!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: laconic

Spoken like someone who truly has no clue what’s going on over there.


51 posted on 10/17/2007 5:12:12 PM PDT by CougarGA7 (I'm supporting a Conservative not a RINO http://www.gohunter08.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: plain talk

“Actually a student of history would instantly recognize that the war went well. The peacekeeping operation in Iraq has gone moderately OK as well by historical standards.”

The problem with your analysis is that it is correct, and half of America and the entire Democratic leadership, and its MSM enablers, think it is heresy.


52 posted on 10/17/2007 5:13:36 PM PDT by ought-six ("Give me liberty, or give me death!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: 300magnum
Dear Mr. President,

Putin is not your friend.

53 posted on 10/17/2007 5:23:29 PM PDT by Sawdring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeremiah Jr
U.S. President George W. Bush warned on Wednesday a nuclear-armed Iran could lead to World War III

"V'hinei, tzfir ha-izzim ba min ha-ma'arav al pnei kal ha-aretz..."

54 posted on 10/17/2007 6:22:20 PM PDT by Thinkin' Gal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 300magnum
Russia, which is building Iran's first atomic power plant

It must be taken out.

55 posted on 10/17/2007 7:07:17 PM PDT by xzins (If you will just agree to the murdering of your children, we can win the presidency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 300magnum

Mr. President, World War III lasted from 1946-1991. We lost over 110,000 men in that fight.

The War against (Islamic) Terror is World War IV.

Whether the world gets on board or not, it is time for the bombing to begin. Soon it will be too late.

And if someone smuggles a nuclear weapon across the southern border and detonates it in one of our cities, all hell will break loose. Count on it.


56 posted on 10/17/2007 7:14:51 PM PDT by exit82 (Major General, Armchair Warriors USA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dajjal
Shouldn't that be World War Five?

I could have thought Four myself. What am I missing?

57 posted on 10/17/2007 7:18:10 PM PDT by supercat (Sony delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 300magnum

Well it appears some people have trouble with their counting. There hasn’t been a WWIII ... yet.


58 posted on 10/17/2007 7:22:57 PM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: supercat

World War III was the Cold War.


59 posted on 10/17/2007 7:24:15 PM PDT by Milwaukee_Guy (Don't hit them between the eyes. Hit them right -in- the eyes!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: o_zarkman44

praise the ford!

/s

will bush bot send a fleet of starships to pick us up?


60 posted on 10/17/2007 7:25:28 PM PDT by ken21 ( people die + you never hear from them again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-150 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson