Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told NBC's "Meet the Press" today that Iran was just six to seven months away from being able to build a nuclear bomb.
“You have to place that red line before them now, before it's too late," Netanyahu said, referring to U.S. refusal to set a red line on Iran’s nuclear developments. (Reuters, 16 September)
Also in the same program, Netanyahu warned that containment for Iran will not work because he said Tehran was led by a “leadership of fanaticism.”
“Iran is guided by a leadership with an unbelievable fanaticism,” Netanyahu said. “You want these fanatics to have nuclear weapons?”
Netanyahu’s unusually public dispute with President Obama, especially at the height of U.S. election campaign exposes the deep differences between the Israel government and Obama administration over the handling of Iranian nuclear developments.
To be fair, If the U.S. and its master, Israel, could, why can't IRAN? Is Israel really being scared and haunted with its own's self-created shadow?
why on earth do you even bother to reflect this guys claims
everyone knows he lies and so do you...
what are your intentions one might want to ask
Mat, What choice do they have?
Either side for that matter... at some point the talking stops. Soon, we will know who is bluffing.
Nader, it would be useful when relaying these newswire reports to provide a minimum of background on previous Netanyahu and Israeli official claims:
1992: Israeli member of parliament Benyamin Netanyahu predicts that Iran is “3 to 5 years” from having a nuclear weapon.
1992: Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres predicts an Iranian nuclear warhead by 1999 to French TV.
1995: The New York Times quotes US and Israeli officials saying that Iran will have the bomb by 2000.
etc, etc, etc...
What would be a preliminary cost for a nuclear detterent against let say an aircraftcarrier similar to those deployed around the PG?
@ Mark Pyruz
Was under the impression the Netanyahu comment was made in 1995, not '92, I have referenced it a couple of times myself.
As far as I know Rabin was the one to warn about Iran's potential to produce nuclear weapons back in 1992.
Neither way the 'ticking bomb' rhetoric still prevails in the mainstream, and sadly people are convinced that danger is becoming more imminent, as a result, as you know, irrationality is reaching new heights.
Sanford said at 3:10PM
"Mat, What choice do they have"
They have a choice to treat Islamic Republic like they threat China.
The Islamic Republic choice only is to defend itself.
If I would have any advice to the Islamic Rebublic of Iran it might be to consider suspension of the 20% enrichment for two years in exchange that all sanctions will be removed during that time.
The further enrichment to 20% might be suspended for next couple years in exchange for a free delivery of 20% enriched uranium to Iran.
During that suspension period a plan for the ME, free of the WMD, should be ready for implementation.
Dissident 7:23 PM
I agree re 20%, and have for some time hoped that Tehran is holding this as their offering at the precise moment.
If Tehran offers deal on 20% (which is not needed to be domestically produced at this moment)... any talk of attack is then "off of the table" for quite sometime. Tehran already has the knowledge/data... forgo the 20% and both sanctions and Israel are downsized. However, if Tehran presses on from an ego angle, this is likely to trigger an event... a false flag, whatever... as pretext. If Israel then did strike, and Tehran countered on U.S. regional assets, Tehran can expect a complete decimation of infrastructure. This is not desired, but there are those who would use the opportunity to do so, and the capability is in theater and ready. Tehran- 20%, think about it. A more interesting "move" delays confrontation and gives both sides more time... who is smarter in utilization of that time?
Quite the dichotomy... one side says "with more time we can defeat the program" while the other says "with more time we can advance the program secretly to fruition..." ) Hmm.
On both sides, there are those who shares similar goals, for conflict, and against... but time is not unlimited under present sentiment.
The significance of Netanyahu's remarks is not his estimate of whether Iran can make the bomb within 6 months or not, although that's an important comment and we need to take it into account when analyzing the Iranian program, but I see the remarks as yet another direct challenge to Obama administration on the eve of the U.S. presidential election.
The U.S. has made it clear that they will react differently if they were convinced that the Iranians had made the decision to go ahead with building the bomb. Netanyahu is saying that the Iranians have made that decision and are actually building the bomb. He is still hoping to drag the U.S. into a war with Iran, something that the Obama administration has steadfastly refused.
In all these years following Iran and Mideast politics, I have not seen the U.S.-Israeli relations plunging so low. Eventually, we need the two to come up with a rational common stance on the issue and do not let their disagreements add to an already volatile political situation in the region.
this blog should cover iranian ststements if it is to cover israeli ones... I know the present situation between israel and the us need coverage, but if thi s is your goal you should expilicitly say so in the article, rather then repeat a news you have already repeated so many times before
Thanks very much for a thoughtful analysis.
I see that the saboteurs are at it again!
Anyone know if the Fordow units are back in service yet?
If iran gets bombs in 6 or 7 months, I'll suspect that Netanyahu sent them.
Probably, because the IAEA's inspectors paid a visit to the Fordow facility, shortly after the sabotage.
Post a Comment