Netanyahu: Stop Iran or I will
posted at 10:56 am on April 1, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Benjamin Netanyahu may have pulled off quite a feat in striking a Likud-Labor alliance, but don’t think that he’s completely mellowed. Before he took the oath of office as Prime Minister, Bibi told Barack Obama that the US had two missions — fixing the economy and preventing Iran from getting nuclear weapons. Netanyahu also warned Obama that Israel would accomplish the second mission if the new President wasn’t up to the task:
The primary imperative for the United States and President Barack Obama is to put an end to Iran’s nuclear race, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said before his swearing-in Tuesday, adding that if the US failed to do so Israel might be forced to resort to a military strike on the Islamic Republic’s nuclear installations.
“The Obama presidency has two great missions: fixing the economy, and preventing Iran from gaining nuclear weapons,” Netanyahu told The Atlantic. The Iranian drive for a nuclear weapon was a “hinge of history,” he said, emphasizing that all of “Western civilization” was responsible for preventing an Iranian bomb. …
Netanyahu suggested that Israeli preemptive strikes against perceived threats were the result of the Jewish people learning from a long history of grappling against those who threatened their collective existence. He cited Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s repeated calls to “wipe Israel off the map,” as well as a recent remark by the country’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, to the effect that Israel was a “cancerous tumor.”
The new relationship between Israel and the US has already gotten off to a rocky start, and that can be seen in the difference between priorities. Notice that Netanyahu doesn’t mention the establishment of a Palestinian state as one of Obama’s missions. Netanyahu may have softened on that issue, but not to the point where he’s become misguided as to the real existential threat to Israel. The Palestinians are a problem that requires management, but do not by themselves pose a threat of annihilation to Israel. A nuclear-armed Iran does.
Obama wants to open a dialogue with Iran, but Netanyahu seems very skeptical about the possibilities for success along those lines. He declared himself pessimistic that dialogue alone would have any effect, but thought tougher economic sanctions had a chance. However, Netanyahu also pointed out what should be obvious — that Iranian theocrats don’t always act in pragmatic self-interest. That makes them more dangerous than any other nuclear power, he argued, because of the strong streak of millenialism in Tehran. Once they had the bomb, they might act rationally — but how could we trust them to do so?
It sounds as though Israel will only give a very short window for the US to take effective action before Netanyahu acts on his own. If he does so, it will put Obama on the spot; will he back the traditional American ally, or will he side with the country that hid its nuclear program for years and supports international terror through Hezbollah, Hamas, and Iraqi insurgents? Either way, an Israeli action will make Obama look impotent on the world stage. Netanyahu is clearly sending a signal for Obama to avoid looking emasculated.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
You should totally replace the Hotair guy with Palin by the end of the day Ed
angelwing34215 on April 1, 2009 at 11:40 AM
Fixed that for everyone.
DeathToMediaHacks on April 1, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Can we have a thread to guess who wrote the Julie Limbaugh piece? My guess is that its Coulter getting back at Megan McCain. The NY school reference seems to be the give.
budfox on April 1, 2009 at 11:42 AM
The Palin pics are one whole helluva lot better than Obama pics.
Speakup on April 1, 2009 at 11:42 AM
I second that. Unfortunately, I don’t get the feeling there is a particular urgency in this admin about thwarting Iranian nuclear power/weapons acquisition.
Netanyahu’s strength is admirable.
RepubChica on April 1, 2009 at 11:42 AM
I agree.
INC on April 1, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Ironic how at odds Obama seems to be with our Allies, even more so than Bush was with his “cowboy” foreign policy.
They like Obama because he makes us weak
Daemonocracy on April 1, 2009 at 11:43 AM
Death, you couldn’t fix an empty piss pot.
Speakup on April 1, 2009 at 11:43 AM
I am digging the Palin splashes. I only wish we could see something like that on a daily basis beyond April Fool’s Day. ;-)
Perhaps a Palin Photo Phlashback Post (P4) prominently pheatured might phill the bill? *giggle*
God bless you guys at Hot Air!
itzWicks on April 1, 2009 at 11:44 AM
Can we trade leaders? BiBi 2012!!!
Viper1 on April 1, 2009 at 11:44 AM
Sounds like what we’ve been trying for several years to no effect. Or are you suggesting something more? If so, specifically what?
DarkCurrent on April 1, 2009 at 11:44 AM
B.S. Hotair gets criticized because one blogger only posts multiple negative stories on Palin, ignoring the fact that they are mostly untrue, ignores any positive articles, and adds editorial comments or misleading leads to articles to make her look bad.
Only a couple of people have complained about the photos most of us are enjoying them. I would also point out that the photos are flattering and not to make her look silly which are the type the other unnamed blogger usually posted.
Blake on April 1, 2009 at 11:46 AM
You must have never met a Sayeret Isreali special forces commando…
RepubChica on April 1, 2009 at 11:46 AM
I’m happy my tax dollars help fund the IDF and IAF. I’m not so happy my tax dollars are going to help rebuild the Palestinian ghetto propagated by the UN that has to keep getting destroyed by the IDF/IAF.
bluelightbrigade on April 1, 2009 at 11:46 AM
I think I just heard Chris Matthews run screaming out of the room! Is he a regular Hot Air reader?
/snickers
Mr_Magoo on April 1, 2009 at 11:46 AM
Whatever “pressure” we have been using for the last 30 years hasn’t seemed to work. Bibi has proposed ‘over-pressure’. You know, the stuff that makes things fly apart.
Limerick on April 1, 2009 at 11:46 AM
Thankfully previous administrations were smarter than the current.
DarkCurrent on April 1, 2009 at 11:46 AM
We’ve yet to engage the true regional powers. We’ve been acting as if US/European sanctions are somehow enough. India’s got a port of call in Iran. China is guzzling Iranian oil exports. Our multilateral regime with regards to Iran is useless without those 2 powers. As with the 6 party talks…the regional powers with an interest in stability need to take the lead…we’ve yet to even try and engage them on that front.
as for the russians…f*ck them
ernesto on April 1, 2009 at 11:48 AM
Nice April Fools Joke. I like it.
cjs1943 on April 1, 2009 at 11:49 AM
Hey. I wanted to invite you to my 漢文 blog, if you’re interested in that. It’s on my name.
amkun on April 1, 2009 at 11:49 AM
Tougher sanctions which would do some good and not be violated by those agreeing to them aren’t going to happen. That’s just happy talk to avoid making a tough decision. This won’t be solved by diplomacy. If Iran gets it’s nuke, look for a runaway nuclear arms race in the region and more handwringing diplomacy much too late. Now is the time for hard decisions to be made.
a capella on April 1, 2009 at 11:50 AM
6 Degrees of Separation Game
This attempt is a little lame, but I’m trying to get the hang of it.
1. Netanyahu warned Obama that Israel would accomplish the second mission if the new President wasn’t up to the task.
2. Isreal’s flag is blue and white with a Star of David.
3. Sarah Palin is a star!
BigD on April 1, 2009 at 11:51 AM
How many years should we give that?
DarkCurrent on April 1, 2009 at 11:51 AM
Right. Though I’d add, it’s one thing for evil states using the nuke as leverage in the world court and quite another were one of those to fall into the hands of OBL.
amkun on April 1, 2009 at 11:53 AM
In case nobody said it yet:
“ED, YOU MAGNIFICENT BASTARD!”
Sapwolf on April 1, 2009 at 11:53 AM
If nice343 shows up to say that the Jews run America, don’t say I didn’t warn you last night.
DTMH’s little bit of snark doesn’t do the trick. We need full-bore Jooooooooooo-hate.
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on April 1, 2009 at 11:53 AM
Thanks – I’ll check it out.
DarkCurrent on April 1, 2009 at 11:54 AM
Jugears would have to look masculine to be at risk of looking emasculated. He looks like what he is-a metrosexual Marxist punk. Go Bibi!
single stack on April 1, 2009 at 11:54 AM
Gee, wrong on both counts. I know you never let that stop you, though. Excelsior!
MadisonConservative on April 1, 2009 at 11:54 AM
Her Majesty
alexraye on April 1, 2009 at 11:55 AM
how realistic is that arms race scenario…really? S. Korea doesn’t have a bomb…neither do any of the other east asians bar china. im not saying its impossible, but is that arms race scenario a certainty?
aside from that, so long as negotiations dont involve india and china of course they’re useless.
You start now, get a regional 6-party esque framework done by the end of the year, and give them another year to work on it. if iranian national politics havent solved this problem (by defeating hardliners) we’ll have to assess military options…but theres no sense in doing it now.
ernesto on April 1, 2009 at 11:56 AM
Great. Sounds like a plan… for three or so years ago. Like I said earlier, Iran’s nuke plans aren’t just running on a treadmill. They progress every day.
amkun on April 1, 2009 at 11:56 AM
DeathToMediaHacks on April 1, 2009 at 11:42 AM
You must have never met a Sayeret Isreali special forces commando…
RepubChica on April 1, 2009 at 11:46 AM
—–
All the hardware in the world doesn’t mean s*** if there’s nobody with the balls to *use* it….
Mew
acat on April 1, 2009 at 11:56 AM
However long it takes the State Department to outfit Hillary in a new hibab pantsuit and give her a “reset” button (translated into Arabic, of course) to present to the Mullahs.
Hillary scampers over there and her schoolgirl charm will no doubt win those Mullahs over faster than you can say, “Whitewater”.
NoDonkey on April 1, 2009 at 11:57 AM
If nice343 shows up to say that the Jews run America, don’t say I didn’t warn you last night.
Nice343 is known to have more than one incarnation, so you may get his opinion but under a different name.
Bishop on April 1, 2009 at 11:58 AM
Yep, it’s just another socialist tactic to spread things around, only in this instance it’s spreading the blame instead of spreading wealth!
Liberalism is a disease that must be eradicated before it eradicates the republic!
Liberty or Death on April 1, 2009 at 11:59 AM
with all due respect our own spies cant even confirm what progress means. while i understand what you’re saying, theres no data that suggests they’ll be lobbing missiles in 2.5-3 years.
and besides…isnt that threat why we were gonna build the missile shield in poland?
ernesto on April 1, 2009 at 11:59 AM
How about throwing a few pix of Angie Harmon into the mix. She gives me a few tingles, if you know what I mean. Nudge, nudge, wink, wink.
Zorg on April 1, 2009 at 12:00 PM
Since when does a nuclear weapon have to be delivered by missle?
Limerick on April 1, 2009 at 12:01 PM
Oh if we were worried about those kinds we would’ve invaded russia, pakistan, and n. korea by now…
ernesto on April 1, 2009 at 12:02 PM
unfortunately, foggy bottom will use google language tool, so the button will actually say “detonate”
runner on April 1, 2009 at 12:02 PM
Why do you suppose this 6-party framework hasn’t come about naturally already? Could it be that certain potential members (say China and Russia) don’t care much if Iran has nukes? I can tell you people in China don’t seem to care. Russia is helping them get them. If it happens the result will be a waste of valuable time. See the case of NK.
DarkCurrent on April 1, 2009 at 12:06 PM
Oh yeah. That’s to protect Poland from IRAN. *wink*
I really hate saying “there’s no time left, the time for action is NOW” because I’m just armchair-quarterbacking, which is lame enough, but it’s over the internet. So, it’s super lame. But honestly, there doesn’t seem to be much time left. Especially considering Iran doesn’t seem to care about negotiations and uses them just to spit in our faces.
amkun on April 1, 2009 at 12:07 PM
The fact that this is even a question is really scary.
morganfrost on April 1, 2009 at 12:07 PM
Kuwait, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, aren’t going to allow a non-Arab Shiite country with aggressive notions to become king of the hill. There is a religious component plus the oil fields. Bet on it.
a capella on April 1, 2009 at 12:07 PM
You are personalizing the story. The issue is Israeli security. If I call 911, and nobody shows up, I’m reaching for the Mossberg.
Limerick on April 1, 2009 at 12:08 PM
I can’t imagine how a destabilization of commodities trading that would result from an Iranian conflict would help the Chinese…maybe no one at state’s made that case to them. i cant speak for how we’ve gone about negotiating thus far…but i do know that we’re not in a position to unilaterally declare war.
and the 6 party talks didnt come about naturally…we had to cajole China into taking responsibility for what could be a gigantic refugee mess.
ernesto on April 1, 2009 at 12:09 PM
I see know you’re a serious geopolitical thinker. I’ll take you more seriously in the future.
DarkCurrent on April 1, 2009 at 12:09 PM
6 party framework. Right. The Obama “administration” will take two years just to get everyone’s name spelled incorrectly at the card table.
Anyway, sell your idea to the Israelis. They have so much success and support in the international community, I’m sure Bibi will go for it.
NoDonkey on April 1, 2009 at 12:11 PM
and i see you’re quite eloquent. ill take you more seriously in the future as well…
ernesto on April 1, 2009 at 12:11 PM
Heh — I see the HA gang is in the April Fool spirit, using a Palin photo on every post, relevant or not.
Paul_in_NJ on April 1, 2009 at 12:11 PM
Mr. President had better remain Israel’s ally. There are Biblical consequences for our nation if he doesn’t.
Genesis 12: 1-3
kingsjester on April 1, 2009 at 12:12 PM
So Ed, is THIS the test Biden spoke of that it would look like “we” were doing the wrong thing?
Mr_Magoo on April 1, 2009 at 12:13 PM
Theres nothing to sell to the israeli’s…they never cared what anyone else thought. they act, often brashly, and with little thought for long term consequences. they’ll do what they wish. if they wanna bomb iran with our planes and bombs, fine. i certainly dont feel we should stop them. but the US is not in a position to invade another country, nor would it advance our long term interests.
ernesto on April 1, 2009 at 12:14 PM
My apologies Ernesto. I use several languages regularly every day. My English sometimes suffers as a result. What’s your excuse?
DarkCurrent on April 1, 2009 at 12:17 PM
A land invasion would not be necessary. This can be done via air and via our Navy support our ally, Israel. Not that Bammy will do it, I don’t think. But it would be the right thing to do.
The Taliban just labeled Hillary’s offer of peace as “lunatic”, seems to me the Iranians have pretty much echoed that kind of rhetoric.
Hope and Change only works on our lickspittle Democrat cheerleader media, is seems.
NoDonkey on April 1, 2009 at 12:18 PM
One thing I have always admired about Bibi is that he isn’t afraid to back up his talk with a really solid punch in the mouth. If he says they will do it…. they will. I also REALLY like the way he called ODopey out. If the Israelis finally decide they’ve had enough of this crap and deal with the murder monkeys, we’ll see what kind of stones “the one” has. As Israel goes, so goes the rest of the world. Stay tuned!
HomeoftheBrave on April 1, 2009 at 12:18 PM
Every war Israel has fought has been about it’s survival.
the_nile on April 1, 2009 at 12:18 PM
A lot of Iran’s military equipment, though out of date, is also American.
aengus on April 1, 2009 at 12:19 PM
That doesn’t mean that all decisions made during those conflicts have been wise.
ernesto on April 1, 2009 at 12:26 PM
I suspect that is the case. Prepping the voter base.
a capella on April 1, 2009 at 12:29 PM
If you plot a “great circle” route (shortest distance between two points on the globe) from Tehran to New York, for example, it passes over northern Poland. If a missile was launched from southern Iran toward New York, it would pass over southern Poland. Poland is a great place to set up missile defenses to protect the UNITED STATES from Iranian nukes.
George W. Bush was a lot better at “stategery” than Obama. Now we have to depend on Bibi.
Steve Z on April 1, 2009 at 12:31 PM
Perhaps, but pretty much 100% of the decisions made by their opponents were utter disasters.
Anyone thinking that Islam will rule the world, should study the Six Day War.
Muslim fanatics and Arab rabble make terrible soldiers.
That’s why they have only two tactics, the desperate siege and the suicide attack. Both failures.
Israel will massacre the Republican Guard and slice off the balls of the Mullahs.
NoDonkey on April 1, 2009 at 12:32 PM
I would suggest a trade of Ogabe for Netanyahu but that would mean certain death for Israel and I can’t abide that.
While we are endangered by the actions of our American Castro, we are not surrounded by nations that want us dead. They just want our failure as a free state…and our money.
SKYFOX on April 1, 2009 at 12:34 PM
I love Bibi, but unfortunately I think he blew it here. her should have stopped with his statement that President Emanuel’s Job Two is stopping Iran. He gave Emanuel the out by promising to do it himself. Emanuel will be more than happy to let him. He can now send Obama out to make happy diplomatic talk and show his cult fans around the world how “different” he is, while never having to actually make a hard decision to attack Iran, making Israel the villain and not the U.S.
It’s a perfect setup. A shame that Bibi didn’t see it.
rockmom on April 1, 2009 at 12:36 PM
I don’t agree that the evidence isn’t clear, from what we (the general public) know is they are within two years of having enough enriched uranium to build several nukes, and this is only the information the general public knows about, I’m certain there is much more information that is classified that the general public is unaware of.
Also, as far as Iran being a threat goes; when confronted with an adversary that constantly calls for your ultimate destruction (both Israel and the US) only a complete idiot and fool would not to take them at their word. It is not the US or Israel that is calling for Iran to be wiped off the map, face of the earth, nor is it Israel or the US that has rallies after Friday prayers chanting “death to America” or “death to Israel” it is the Iranians!
When I see the Iranian military parades with their rocket launchers adorned with banners that read “America we will crush you under our feet” I take that seriously especially when most think tanks and other nuke experts say Iran is within two years of having several nukes.
As sven pointed out:
Personally I’m not willing to risk it, better them then us!
Did anyone say anything about invading Iran, no they didn’t. What is being considered is a strike (more then likely with special forces and air power) to take out their nuke facilities, no one is talking about an invasion.
On your fist point, no it’s not guaranteed that the scenario of Iran obtaining nukes and using them against the US or Israel will occur, however as I pointed out in an above comment when you have an adversary that is CONSTANTLY rattling their saber and saying they want to wipe you off of the face of the earth and destroy you and every Friday after prayers chanting “death to America” only an idiot and fool would look the other way and assume it is merely saber rattling! Burying your head in the sand and assuming it is mere “talk” goes completely against common sense and our innate survival instinct, it is unwise to not take your adversaries seriously!
As to your second point regarding NK getting nukes under Bush, once again typical of lefties placing blame where it does not belong, you should do some research on which administration brokered the original nuke disarmament agreement with NK, if my memory serves me correctly it was under the Clintoon administration as I remember how triumphantly Clintoon and Albright trumpeted that “major agreement” which NK never did (nor did they intend to) comply with in the first place! Clintoon and Albright were suckered by NK and it was Bush that was left holding the bag, so GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT AND STOP BLAMING BUSH FOR EVERYTHING, IT’S GETTING OLD AND ONLY MAKES YOU AND THE LEFT LOOK LIKE THE IMMATURE CHILDREN YOU ARE!
Liberty or Death on April 1, 2009 at 12:38 PM
Bibi knows that the Obama-Mugabe regime has no interest in taking on Iran.
There’s no payoffs to Democrat donors and no advancement of Obama-Mugabe’s neo-Marxist vision, there. Might not be a big help in helping Obama-Mugabe steal the election in 2012.
This is just to let the world know, that the US is not a reliable ally, at this point in time. We have a feckless, unqualified, unreliable, irresponsible, corrupt and incompetent figurehead in the White House, unfortunately.
NoDonkey on April 1, 2009 at 12:40 PM
He probably realized that’s what’s going to happen anyway.
DarkCurrent on April 1, 2009 at 12:42 PM
Sorry to go off topic, but the issue of Iran getting nuclear missile capability is a great conundrum to me.
Given the Iranian regime’s statements and actions, I think it’s reasonable for Israel to act preemptively to defend itself. Yet, there will be negative consequences for Israel if they do. Also, how long would such action serve as a deterrent? 10 years? 20 years? Then, Iran will again be on the threshold and Israel will have to act again? Yet, if Israel does not act, a nuclear Iran will pose a threat not only to Israel but to the entire middle East.
And anti-missile defense, while helpful, and foolish of Obama to be willing to trade away, seems only a delaying measure.
There needs to be regime change in Iran. But more, there needs to be cultural change. And as I don’t see that happening, the Iran problem looks like it will be here for a very long time.
So, back on topic: Here you go.
Loxodonta on April 1, 2009 at 12:47 PM
Right idea but maybe a bit different order.
I grab the Mossberg 500, give a warning, call 911, then rack the action for effect.
I suspect Bibi has a plan that already doesn’t involve POTUS or TOTUS. He just gave the warning. He does not expect a response from THE ONE.
Yoop on April 1, 2009 at 12:47 PM
First of all, riding caps lock is a surefire way to come off as immature.
Secondly, you place too much importance on Iranian rhetoric. You give them too much credit. The soviets told us they’d bury us…yet the nukes didnt fly.
while i understand that theres a military option and that it shouldnt be put off at all costs…the given data doesnt command an immediate US military response.
ernesto on April 1, 2009 at 12:48 PM
It is quite the conundrum. But to hear it from the HotAir conventional wisdom…the issue is a simple as any other.
ernesto on April 1, 2009 at 12:49 PM
Answer: Because if you are ill taking medicine lets you live longer.
Limerick on April 1, 2009 at 12:49 PM
Absolutely. Sometimes one must take medications with unpleasant side effects in order to survive. However, I would still prefer an actual cure for the disease.
Loxodonta on April 1, 2009 at 1:00 PM
DeathToMediaHacks on April 1, 2009 at 11:42 AM
You seem to have a problem with Israel defending itself against enemies who are pledged to it’s destruction.
MarkTheGreat on April 1, 2009 at 1:08 PM
No matter where he got the weapons, he’s entitled to use them if he sees an existential threat.
I’m not a 100% supporter of Israeli policy, but I can see that there is an existential threat here, and I bet you do too.
Draw a great circle between Israel and Natanz (or any other facility marked as nuclear by the FAS in Iran), and you’ll see why a warning to the US is needed. Also consider DTMH’s comment above, and consider that Israel may well need resupply after the attempt. I think Barack is being given warning not to stand in the way, because Israel knows the US is not going to act before they do.
unclesmrgol on April 1, 2009 at 1:16 PM
So from the Israeli respective, the leaders of a neighboring country has told them numerous times that they want to destroy Israel and kill all of the Israelis. There is no disputing that Iran has said that, unless you are Juan Cole.
Now, Iran is gaining the means necessary to carry out their threat.
How “complex” is this issue? Maybe it is for us, but for the Israelis?
A holocaust survivor once said, “When someone tells you he wants to kill you — believe him.”
Why would Obama expect the Israelis to stand down against Iran? Does he know nothing of history?
This isn’t “complex”. “Complex” is just a word cowards use to kick the can down the road.
The Israelis can’t afford to do that.
Obama can help Israel do the job right and limit the conflict, to the point that Iran is utterly and completely defeated, or he can potentially get millions of our close allies killed because he refuses to do the job that he was elected to do. Which is to look after American interests and that includes ridding the world of threats to our homeland because don’t forget, the Iranians have threatened many times to obliterate us as well.
NoDonkey on April 1, 2009 at 1:16 PM
After BHO has his chat with AckMyDumbJihad, he will pose under a huge banner that reads,
OMISSION ACCOMPLISHED!
jgapinoy on April 1, 2009 at 1:18 PM
God, I wish McCain had won then died a year into office. Palin would make such an awesome Madame President.
chunderroad on April 1, 2009 at 1:21 PM
Shows his ignorance, Israel had to build their own tanks, Merkava 4, because some ignorant slut prevented anyone else from supplying them tanks…now I’m ignorant about the details there, but I do know they make their own tanks and they are the best in the world.
kirkill on April 1, 2009 at 1:23 PM
Nice to see that the adults are finally in charge in Israel again.
Unlike here…
Del Dolemonte on April 1, 2009 at 1:48 PM
I capped the ending as emphasis to ensure you got my point, nothing immature about it.
I don’t believe I place enough emphasis on Iran’s rhetoric, again, to not take an adversaries threats seriously goes completely against common sense and our innate survival instincts, you may be willing to wait and see but I for one (and I’m certain many agree with me) am not willing to bet my survival or the survival of my family and the republic on the off chance Iran’s belligerence are merely words!
As for your comparison to the soviets, well if it weren’t for the fact the US took Russia for its word that they would “bury us” and made it clear to them there would be consequences for their actions through such US moves as the soviet blockade during the Cuba missile crisis and our MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) doctrine there is no doubt in my mind that Russia would have made good on their promise to bury us. We spoke softly and carried a big stick and Russia knew this.
Iran on the other hand does not fear the MAD doctrine, in fact they embrace it as they believe such a conflict will bring about the return of the missing Imam and the reinstatement of the Caliphate, that is their ultimate goal; their goal (unlike the soviets) is more about religious ideology then political ideology, they want to usher in the missing Imam, hell even “I’m-a-mad-dinner-jacket” has already comissioned the building of the raod that the missing Imam will travel on when they usher in his return! This is what makes Iran much more dangerous than Russia during the height of the cold war.
Pacifism, weakness and assuming your adversary’s saber rattling is merely “rhetoric” is a very dangerous assumption/position to take ernesto. You may be willing to gamble that it is mere rhetoric but I’m not (nor should the US and Israeli government) and as I previously stated better them then us, but you go ahead and keep those rose colored glasses on and your head buried in the sand, I know you feel safer that way but you’re just fooling yourself!
Bottom line is when Iran invaded our embassy (an act of war) and held Americans hostage; and for the last 30 years since has called for our destruction and has fully supported terrorism around the world directed at us and Israel, then add to this the fact Iran is working to get nukes I take that very seriously, and anyone that doesn’t (like you) is a FOOL!
Liberty or Death on April 1, 2009 at 1:53 PM
What can I say, I guess they picked the right side.
Also, it’s not like they just make do with what we give them. Israeli’s mod our tanks and weapons into super versions of those tanks/weapons. The U.S. has then been able to update and improve our own weapons based on the Israeli engineering.
JadeNYU on April 1, 2009 at 1:53 PM
they are the world’s top ten arms producer (excel in high tech – precision weapons systems, advanced radar systems ); I believe UAVs(unmanned areal vehicles) were developed in Israel; excellent missile technology – Python, Popeye smart missiles for example; high performance defense electronic capabilities, c3 systems. So, yes DTMH claims are typical of the leftist screeching.
runner on April 1, 2009 at 1:57 PM
Let’s see. As another poster has pointed out, Israel does not use American tanks, they build their own, the Merkava (now in its 4th gen) because they feel it is better suited to their needs.
American tanks are now equipped with reactive armor and other technological advances developed by the Israelis, including the Trophy tank defense system that is now standard equipment on M1A1 tanks and US APC like the Stryker and Bradley.
They also manufacture their own guns. Ever heard of the UZI? The IDF is replacing the UZI with the Tabor rifle, also an Israeli development.
Yes, Israel uses US military planes, but they’ve developed avionics that are now spec’d on top line US fighters.
They also use US missiles, but they’ve modified them for more precise killing (like taking out Hamas leaders) with less collateral damage.
The US gets very good return value on military aid to Israel.
rokemronnie on April 1, 2009 at 1:58 PM
I should add, and of the some rightist screeching as well (buchanan, and ron paul)
runner on April 1, 2009 at 2:00 PM
In the 80′s, the Iranians sent their children into minefields to clear them so that their tanks could roll unimpeded against Iraq.
Agree – Anyone who thinks the murderous lunatics who run Iran are like Barack Obama and merely make speeches because they like to hear themselves squawk and that they don’t really mean what they say, has another thing coming.
NoDonkey on April 1, 2009 at 2:01 PM
I’d also like to add that you did not have an answer to my pointing out to you that Bush was not at fault for the NK nukes, but in fact it was the Clintoon administration (Slick Willy and Albright) that got suckered by NK when they made that nuke agreement, an agreement NK never intended on complying with and left Bush holding the bag!
Instead you deflect by pointing out that I capped some words…typical lefty tactic, when someone catches you in an outright lefty propaganda lie deflect from the topic!
A weak and epic fail ernesto!
Liberty or Death on April 1, 2009 at 2:07 PM
You’re reading comprehension would be higher if you removed your lips, so firmly planted, off his ass.
Blake on April 1, 2009 at 2:24 PM
Please, somehow, can we trade our TOTUS for Israel’s PM?
please……………
Janos Hunyadi on April 1, 2009 at 2:28 PM
works for me.
saiga on April 1, 2009 at 2:47 PM
Five will get you ten that Obama will still look emasculated. ‘Cause he fundamentally is.
PersonalLiberty on April 1, 2009 at 3:18 PM
They can have Bammy, Mammy and the entire worthless, corrupt and incompetent Democrat Congress.
We’ll take Bibi. He’s more American than Obama-Mugabe is, anyway.
NoDonkey on April 1, 2009 at 3:20 PM
Hey, sarah Palin could stop Iran right now(if she wanted to)
She is just waitin for 2012 when she takes power and crushes them like the little bugs they are.
Why
Sarah Palin rocks and this is how she rolls.
She takes no crap and even Chuck norris is wary of her
kangjie on April 1, 2009 at 4:36 PM
Damn skippy!!!
mossberg500 on April 1, 2009 at 4:59 PM
I’m not saying that Kim Jong Il should have been allowed to acquire nukes, but the fact that he doesn’t believe he’s getting 72 virgins when fire is returned has a lot to do with it.
jimmy2shoes on April 1, 2009 at 5:06 PM
Maybe it’s just me, but I’m not really bothered by this.
jimmy2shoes on April 1, 2009 at 5:07 PM
Not just you. Doesn’t bother me at all. I’d be happy to buy them some bullets myself.
joe_doufu on April 1, 2009 at 5:24 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »