Iranian Nuclear Threat Targets U.S., Israel

More Zionist propaganda intended to set the stage for yet another war for Israel!:

 

http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/iran_nuclear_threat/2009/08/30/254223.html?s=al&promo_code=8785-1

Iranian Nuclear Threat Targets U.S., Israel

Sunday, August 30, 2009 5:11 PM

By: Chris Wessling

Concerns about Iran’s nuclear capabilities — and their potentially devastating impact on America — are mounting, a special report from Newsmax.TV reveals.

 

You can see Newsmax.TV’s report on the growing Iranian nuclear threat – Click Here Now

 

 

 

The Islamic republic has test-fired missiles capable of reaching Israel, southeastern Europe, and U.S. bases in the Mideast — and published reports say Iran is within a year of developing its own nuclear bomb.

 

Security experts warn that even one nuclear device in the hands of a rogue nation could be used against the United States in a devastating electromagnetic pulse attack, an intense burst of energy from an exploding nuclear warhead high above the Earth.

 

So why isn’t the Obama administration doing more to prevent a nuclear nightmare?

 

“I get very, very nervous about it,” Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., told Newsmax.TV’s Kathleen Walter. “I think Iran will have a nuclear weapon. I think now it’s only a question of when.”

 

The United States is caught in the middle of a Mideast faceoff between one of its strongest allies, Israel, and Iran. Iran has threatened to wipe Israel off the map, and Israel refuses to rule out a preemptive strike against its adversary, while insisting that Iran must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons.

 

If the United States tries to prevent Iran from making nuclear weapons, its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has vowed a campaign of bloody revenge.

 

Iran’s hatred of Israel “is rooted in ideology,” said Walid Phares of Foundation for Defense of Democracies. “The Iranian regime is jihadist, and they do not acknowledge nor accept the idea that a non-Islamic, non-jihadist state could exist in the region.”

 

Although Iran is thousands of miles from America’s shores, its belligerent actions could have far-reaching repercussions. A regional war or nuclear attack could cause an already shaky U.S. economy to collapse.

 

Even scarier is the growing threat of an electromagnetic pulse attack, security analysts say. Such an attack could destroy all electronic devices over a massive area, from cell phones to computers to America’s electrical grid, experts say.

 

“Within a year of that attack, nine out of 10 Americans would be dead, because we can’t support a population of the present size in urban centers and the like without electricity,” said Frank Gaffney, president of the Center for Security Policy. “That would be a world without America, as a practical matter. And that is exactly what I believe the Iranians are working towards.”

 

President Barack Obama has committed the U.S. government to a diplomatic approach for resolving the high-stakes nuclear dispute, but Iran has rebuffed Obama’s overtures. Meanwhile, Congress is working on legislation to grant Obama the power to impose crippling sanctions on Iran if the talk-first approach doesn’t work.

 

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., says such sanctions are long overdue.

 

“A nuclear Iran is a threat to the Iranian people, to Israel, to the Middle East, to the national security of the United States. And what is Congress doing about it? Nothing. We have proposed legislation time and time again to have real, substantial sanctions leveled against Iran. Now, we like to point fingers and say the U.N. has not done enough, but really we should be pointing the fingers at ourselves.”

 

The Obama administration has pressed Israel to halt all settlement building and to refrain from attacking Iran, hoping such efforts will lure Iran and other Mideast Arab nations to the negotiating table.

 

Mort Klein, president of the Zionist Organization of America, says that sort of approach is wrong.

 

“[Obama] says Arabs can keep building in the West Bank, Arabs can keep building in eastern Jerusalem . . . but Jews can’t. There’s no other way to define this than racist.”

 

Time is running out to stop Iran, Klein says.

 

“America should say that everything is on the table and we will pursue whatever is necessary – military option, severe sanctions, whatever is necessary to stop these weapons. This is serious business. Al-Qaida has made clear how seriously they can harm American interests, and with nuclear weapons it’s just beyond belief the horror that can ensue.”

 

But some critics are pushing for less intervention.

 

“Arguing for sanctions against Iran, and threatening them with bombs, or encouraging Israel to bomb Iran makes no sense whatsoever,” said Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas. “So many other times this argument has been won by pure economics . . . This is what brought the Soviets to their knees – it was financial.”

 

Others wonder whether the United States missed the perfect opportunity to disarm Iran, failing to take advantage of the widespread turmoil and push for reform that occurred in the aftermath of the country’s disputed recent presidential elections.

 

“Eventually the Iranian regime, if not reformed from the inside, is going to get the nukes, is going to use them in a deterrence fashion, and eventually if there is a confrontation it may use them for real,” Phares said. “This revolt of Tehran may well become another Iranian revolution. Now its success is conditioned by how far the United States and the international community go in assisting this democratic movement.”

 

The more time Obama devotes to the diplomatic approach, critics warn, the more time Iran has to realize its nuclear ambitions and even sell its technology to other nations or terrorists.

 

“I think the president’s learning a lesson,” Hoekstra said. “I mean, the president was brutal on the previous administration on foreign policy, saying, you know, ‘Your policy on North Korea is bad; your policy on Iran is bad.’ Everywhere and anything the former president did in foreign policy was terrible [according to Obama], and he was going to come in and fix it. I think he’s finding out that foreign policy is hard.”

 

 

You can see Newsmax.TV’s report on the growing Iranian nuclear threat – Click Here Now

 

———————————————————————-

Look at the real threat to Europe (and the US as well if we get into yet another war for Israel in the Middle East):

Israeli Professor – ‘We Could
Destroy All European Capitals’

http://www.rense.com/general34/esde.htm

Why Not Crippling Sanctions for US and Israel?:

http://america-hijacked.com/2009/08/31/why-not-crippling-sanctions-for-israel-and-the-us/

Obama’s War Signals: Iran in the crosshairs

http://america-hijacked.com/2009/07/18/obama%E2%80%99s-war-signals-iran-in-the-crosshairs/

4 Responses to “Iranian Nuclear Threat Targets U.S., Israel”

  • Patriot says:

    Even more Zionist propaganda intended to get US into yet another war for Israel in the Middle East with even more Americans to get killed/maimed as a result:

    http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-gold6-2009aug06,0,3778030.story

    latimes.com
    Opinion
    Iran’s nuclear aspirations threaten the world
    The Islamic Republic has proved it only uses talks with the West as a delaying tactic as it relentlessly pursues nuclear arms. Only severe sanctions backed by military threat will have any impact.
    By Dore Gold

    August 6, 2009

    Writing From Jerusalem

    Defying both history and logic, the idea that the West should diplomatically engage with Tehran still commands an important following.

    Despite the massive waves of demonstrators across Iran who charged their government with rigging the June 12 presidential elections, there still are officials in the Obama ad- ministration who seem to believe that engagement with the Islamic Republic should “remain on the table,” as columnist Roger Cohen put it in the New York Times Magazine this week. Javier Solana, the European Union foreign policy chief, agrees: “We would like very much that soon we will have the possibility to restart multilateral talks with Iran on the important nuclear issues,” he said on June 24.

    But they’re wrong, just as they have been from the start. Indeed, there are plenty of reasons to be skeptical about sticking to engagement. The main one is that it has already been tried — and utterly failed. Iran has consistently used the West’s willingness to engage as a delaying tactic, a smoke screen behind which Iran’s nuclear program has continued undeterred and, in many cases, undetected.

    Back in 2005, Hassan Rowhani, the former chief nuclear negotiator of Iran during the reformist presidency of Mohammad Khatami, made a stunning confession in an internal briefing in Tehran, just as he was leaving his post. He explained that in the period during which he sat across from European negotiators discussing Iran’s uranium enrichment ambitions, Tehran quietly managed to complete the critical second stage of uranium fuel production: its uranium conversion plant in Isfahan. He boasted that the day Iran started its negotiations in 2003 “there was no such thing as the Isfahan project.” Now, he said, it was complete.

    Rowhani’s revelation showed clearly how Iran exploited the West’s engagement. Moreover, the Iranians violated their 2004 agreement with the EU and brilliantly dragged out further negotiations that followed. Equally important, they delayed Western punitive moves against them, keeping the U.N. Security Council at bay for years.

    Mohammed Javad Larijani, a former deputy foreign minister and brother to Rowhani’s successor as chief negotiator, admitted the logic of diplomatic engagement from the Iranian side: “Diplomacy must be used to lessen pressure on Iran for its nuclear program.”

    Advocates of engagement with Iran often use an unfair argument to advance their case: Their cause, they claim, is opposed mainly by Israel, which is pushing its own narrow agenda. True, Israel is a target of Iran, whose leadership calls for the “elimination of Israel from the region” — to quote the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who said this years before President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. So that there would be no confusion about Iranian intent, Khamenei’s words were hung from a Shahab 3 missile in a military parade in 2003.

    But Israel is not Iran’s only target. If that was the case, the Iranians would have had no reason to develop missiles that fly well past Israeli territory to Central Europe and beyond.

    In fact, the greatest engagement skeptics today are the leaders of the Sunni Arab states from Morocco to Bahrain. The Gulf states in particular have repeatedly been the targets of Iranian subversion operations. Bahrain was called the 14th province of Iran earlier this year by one of Khamenei’s key advisors. Kuwait and Saudi Arabia have been attacked by Iranian-backed Hezbollah operatives in the past. Iran still occupies islands belonging to the United Arab Emirates, close to the oil tanker routes that go through the Strait of Hormuz.

    And Cairo just cracked a large Iranian-supported Hezbollah cell that was planning attacks on key economic centers in the Egyptian state.

    For these reasons, Arab officials don’t need prompting from Israel. Their common fear is that a nuclear Iran will embolden groups such as Hezbollah, which will feel it enjoys a nuclear sponsor protecting it from any retaliatory action. Unlike their Western counterparts, these Arab officials are savvy enough to distinguish between status quo states that just want to assure the security of their borders and ideologically driven revolutionary powers like Iran with expansive aims.

    An Iran with hegemonial aspirations will not be talked out of acquiring nuclear weapons through a new Western incentives package. Only the most severe economic measures aimed at Iran’s dependence on imported gasoline, backed with the threat of Western military power, might pull the Iranians back at the last minute. Until now, U.N. sanctions on Iran have been too weak to have any real impact.

    It is critical to understand that an Iran that crosses the nuclear threshold after repeated warnings that doing so is “unacceptable” would be even less likely to be deterred in the future. It would provide global terrorism the kind of protective umbrella that Al Qaeda never had back on 9/11, including Hezbollah cells located at present in Central Europe and Latin America. Some Arab states, like Qatar, have already been largely “Finlandized,” to borrow a Cold War term for states that make their foreign policy subservient to the wishes of a powerful neighbor. But as Iran’s nuclear program continues unopposed, more Arab states will follow, changing the Middle East entirely.

    Halting the Iranian nuclear program is a global imperative; acquiescing to a nuclear Iran in the hope that it will pragmatically understand the limits of its own power would be a colossal mistake.

    Dore Gold served as Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations from 1997 to 1999. His new book, “The Rise of Nuclear Iran: How Tehran Defies the West,” will be published next month.

  • Patriot says:

    http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE5811V120090902?feedType=nl&feedName=ustopnewsearly

    Iran nuclear “threat” hyped: IAEA’s ElBaradei
    Wed Sep 2, 2009 12:00pm EDT
    VIENNA (Reuters) – Iran is not going to produce a nuclear weapon any time soon and the threat posed by its atomic program has been exaggerated, the U.N. nuclear watchdog chief said in a published interview.

    The West suspects Iran wants to develop a nuclear weapons capability under the guise of a declared civilian atomic energy program. Tehran rejects the charge, saying its uranium enrichment program is a peaceful way to generate electricity.

    Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said there was no concrete evidence that Tehran has an ongoing nuclear weapons program.

    “But somehow, many people are talking about how Iran’s nuclear program is the greatest threat to the world. In many ways, I think the threat has been hyped,” he told the specialist Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.

    ElBaradei said there was concern about Iran’s future nuclear intentions and that the Islamic Republic needs to be more transparent with the Vienna-based U.N. nuclear watchdog.

    “But the idea that we’ll wake up tomorrow and Iran will have a nuclear weapon is an idea that isn’t supported by the facts as we have seen them so far,” said ElBaradei, 67, who will step down in November after 12 years in office.

    The interview was conducted in July but released late on Tuesday.

    Last week, an IAEA report lent some weight to Western intelligence reports that Iran had studied ways to make atom bombs although the agency has repeatedly said it does not have concrete proof of a weapons agenda.

    Iran has refused to provide documentation, access to sites or to nuclear officials for interviews which the IAEA has requested to reach conclusions about the intelligence materials.

    In the interview, ElBaradei said there was an urgent need to follow up on U.S. President Barack Obama’s proposal for a dialogue between Washington and Tehran, but that resorting to harsher sanctions against Iran if it does not engage would achieve little.

    ElBaradei said he had gleaned from experiences dealing with North Korea and Iraq that dialogue was a more effective tool than sanctions. He was not talking about a specific country.

    “Another lesson is to use sanctions only as a last resort and to avoid sanctions that hurt innocent civilians. As we saw in Iraq, sanctions only denied vulnerable, innocent civilians food and medicine,” he said.

    Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator was quoted as saying on Tuesday that Tehran has prepared an “updated nuclear proposal” and is ready to talk to world powers. The West has said it is still waiting for details.

    Germany is to host high-level talks on Iran’s nuclear program on Wednesday with the United States, China, France, Britain and Russia. Western powers are expected to push China and Russia to back a fourth round of U.N. sanctions which could target Iran’s vital energy sector.

    (Reporting by Sylvia Westall; Editing by Mark Heinrich and Jon Hemming)

Leave a Reply